PSY-4500:Week 2 - Assignment: Analyze Experiments

F O R T Y S T U D I E S T H A T C H A N G E D P S Y C H O L O G Y

L

F O R T Y S T U D I E S T H A T C H A N G E D P S Y C H O L O G Y

Explorations into the History of Psychological Research

Sixth Edition

Roger R. Hock, Ph.D. Mendocino College

P e a r s o n E d u c a t i o n I n t e r n a t i o n a l

VP/Editorial Director: Leah Jewell Executive Editor/Project Manager: Jessica Mosher Editorial Assistant: Amanda Bacher Associate Managing Editor: Maureen Richardson Production Liaison: Shelly Kupperman Senior Operations Supervisor: Sherry Lewis Director of Marketing: Brandy Dawson Senior Marketing Manager: Kate Mitchell Marketing Assistant: Jennifer Lang

AV Project Manager: Maria Piper Associate Supplements Editor: Virginia Livsey Director, Cover Design: Jayne Conte Cover Designer: Studio Indigo Cover Image: Getty Images, Inc. Composition and Full-Service Project Management: Aptara, Inc./Puneet Lamba Printer/Binder: R.R. Donnelley & Sons Cover Printer: Phoenix Color Corp.

Credits and acknowledgments borrowed from other sources and reproduced, with permission, in this textbook appear on the appropriate page of appearance within text.

If you purchased this book within the United States or Canada you should be aware that it has been wrongfully imported without the approval of the Publisher or the Author.

Copyright © 2009, 2005, 2002, 1999, 1996 by Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 0 7 4 5 8 . All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. This publication is protected by Copyright and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department.

Pearson Prentice Hall™ is a trademark of Pearson Education, Inc. Pearson* is a registered trademark of Pearson pic Prentice Hall* is a registered trademark of Pearson Education, Inc.

Pearson Education Ltd., London Pearson Education North Asia Ltd., Hong Kong Pearson Education Singapore, Pte. Ltd Pearson Educación de Mexico, S.A. de C V . Pearson Education Canada, Inc. Pearson Education Malaysia, Pte. Ltd. Pearson Education-Japan Pearson Education Upper Saddle River, New Jersey Pearson Education Australia PTY, Limited

P E A R S O N 10 9 8 7 6 5 4

I S B N - 1 3 : 1 7 Ö - D - 1 3 - S 0 M 5 0 7 - 7 I S B N - I D : G - 1 3 - 5 t m s a 7 - X

For Diane Perin Hock and Caroline Mei Perin Hock

CONTENTS

PREFACE xi

CHAPTER I BIOLOGY AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR 1

R E A D I N G 1 : O N E BRAIN O R T W O ? 1 Gazzaniga, M. S. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . The split brain in man. Scientific American, 217(2), 2 4 - 2 9 .

R E A D I N G 2: M O R E EXPERIENCE = B I G G E R BRAIN 11 Rosenzweig, M. R., Bennett, E. L., & Diamond, M. C. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . Brain changes in response to experience. Scientific American, 226(2), 2 2 - 2 9 .

R E A D I N G 3: ARE Y O U A " N A T U R A L ? " 19 Bouchard, T., Lykken, D., McGue, M., Segal, N., & Tellegen, A. ( 1 9 9 0 ) . Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota study of twins reared apart. Science, 250, 2 2 3 - 2 2 9 .

R E A D I N G 4 : W A T C H O U T F O R T H E V I S U A L C L I F F ! 2 7 Gibson, E. J . , & Walk, R. D. ( 1 9 6 0 ) . The "visual cliff." Scientific American, 202(4), 6 7 - 7 1 .

CHAPTER II PERCEPTION AND CONSCIOUSNESS 35

R E A D I N G 5 : TAKE A L O N G L O O K 3 6 Fantz, R. L. ( 1 9 6 1 ) . The origin of form perception. Scientific American, 204(May), 6 1 - 7 2 .

R E A D I N G 6 : T O SLEEP, N O D O U B T T O D R E A M . . . 4 2 Aserinsky, E., & Kleitman, N. ( 1 9 5 3 ) . Regularly occurring periods of eye mobility and concomitant phenomena during sleep. Science, 118, 2 7 3 - 2 7 4 . Dement, W. ( 1 9 6 0 ) . The effect of dream deprivation. Science, 131, 1 7 0 5 - 1 7 0 7 .

R E A D I N G 7 : U N R O M A N C I N G T H E D R E A M 4 9 Hobson, J. A., & McCarley, R. W. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . The brain as a dream-state generator: An activation-synthesis hypothesis of the dream process. American Journal of Psy- chiatry, 134, 1 3 3 5 - 1 3 4 8 .

R E A D I N G 8 : A C T I N G A S I F Y O U ARE H Y P N O T I Z E D 5 6 Spanos, N. R ( 1 9 8 2 ) . Hypnotic behavior: A cognitive, social, psychological per- spective. Research Communications in Psychology, Psychiatry, and Behavior, 7, 1 9 9 - 2 1 3 .

vii

viii Contents

CHAPTER III LEARNING AND CONDITIONING 65

R E A D I N G 9 : IT'S N O T JUST A B O U T SALIVATING D O G S ! 6 5 Pavlov, I. P. ( 1 9 2 7 ) . Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press.

R E A D I N G 10: LITTLE E M O T I O N A L ALBERT 72 Watson, J. B., & Rayner, R. ( 1 9 2 0 ) . Conditioned emotional responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 3, 1-14.

R E A D I N G 11: K N O C K W O O D ! 7 8 Skinner, B. F. ( 1 9 4 8 ) . Superstition in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychol- ogy, 38, 1 6 8 - 1 7 2 .

R E A D I N G 12: SEE A G G R E S S I O N . . . D O A G G R E S S I O N ! 8 5 Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through im- itation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 5 7 5 - 5 8 2 .

CHAPTER IV INTELLIGENCE, COGNITION, AND MEMORY 93

R E A D I N G 13: W H A T Y O U EXPECT I S W H A T Y O U G E T 9 3 Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . Teachers' expectancies: Determinates of pupils' IQ gains. Psychological Reports, 19, 1 1 5 - 1 1 8 .

R E A D I N G 14: JUST H O W ARE Y O U I N T E L L I G E N T ? 1 0 0 Gardner, H. (1983) Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.

R E A D I N G 15: MAPS I N Y O U R M I N D 110 Tolman, E. C. ( 1 9 4 8 ) . Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review, 55, 1 8 9 - 2 0 8 .

R E A D I N G 16: T H A N K S F O R T H E M E M O R I E S ! 11 7 Loftus, E. F. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive Psy- chology, 7, 5 6 0 - 5 7 2 .

CHAPTER V HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 1 2 6

R E A D I N G 17: D I S C O V E R I N G L O V E 1 2 6 Harlow, H. F. ( 1 9 5 8 ) . The nature of love. American Psychologist, 13, 6 7 3 - 6 8 5 .

R E A D I N G 18: O U T O F S I G H T , B U T N O T O U T O F M I N D 1 3 4 Piaget, J. ( 1 9 5 4 ) . The development of object concept. In J. Piaget, The construc- tion of reality in the child (pp. 3 - 9 6 ) . New York: Basic Books.

R E A D I N G 19: H O W M O R A L ARE Y O U ? 1 4 3 Kohlberg, L. ( 1 9 6 3 ) . The development of children's orientations toward a moral order: Sequence in the development of moral thought. Vita Humana, 6, 11-33.

R E A D I N G 20: I N C O N T R O L A N D G L A D O F IT! 1 5 0 Langer, E. J . , & Rodin, J. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . The effects of choice and enhanced personal responsibility for the aged: A field experiment in an institutional setting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 1 9 1 - 1 9 8 .

Contents ix

CHAPTER VI EMOTION AND MOTIVATION 1 5 8 R E A D I N G 21: A SEXUAL M O T I V A T I O N . . . 1 5 8

Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . Human sexual response. Boston: Little, Brown.

R E A D I N G 22:1 C A N SEE IT ALL O V E R Y O U R F A C E ! 1 68 Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. ( 1 9 7 1 ) . Constants across cultures in the face and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 124—129.

R E A D I N G 2 3 : L I F E , C H A N G E , A N D STRESS 1 7 5 Holmes, T. H., & Rahe, R. H. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . The Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 11,213-218.

R E A D I N G 24: T H O U G H T S O U T O F T U N E 1 8 3 Festinger, L., & Carlsmith, J. M. ( 1 9 5 9 ) . Cognitive consequences of forced com- pliance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 2 0 3 - 2 1 0 .

CHAPTER VII PERSONALITY 191 R E A D I N G 25: ARE Y O U T H E MASTER O F Y O U R FATE? 1 9 2

Rotter, J. B. ( 1 9 6 6 ) . Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1-28.

R E A D I N G 26: M A S C U L I N E O R FEMININE . . . O R B O T H ? 1 9 9 Bem, S. L. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The measurement of psychological androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 1 5 5 - 1 6 2 .

R E A D I N G 27: R A C I N G A G A I N S T Y O U R HEART 2 1 0 Friedman, M., & Rosenman, R. H. ( 1 9 5 9 ) . Association of specific overt behavior pattern with blood and cardiovascular findings. Journal of the American Medical Association, 169, 1 2 8 6 - 1 2 9 6 .

R E A D I N G 28: T H E O N E , T H E M A N Y 2 1 7 Triandis, H., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M., Asai, M., & Lucca, N. (1988). Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-ingroup relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 323-338.

CHAPTER VIII PSYCHOPATHOLOGY 2 2 7

R E A D I N G 2 9 : W H O ' S C R A Z Y H E R E , A N Y W A Y ? 2 2 7 Rosenhan, D. L. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . On being sane in insane places. Science, 179, 2 5 0 - 2 5 8 .

R E A D I N G 30: Y O U ' R E G E T T I N G D E F E N S I V E A G A I N ! 2 3 5 Freud, A. ( 1 9 4 6 ) . The ego and the mechanisms of defense. New York: International Universities Press.

R E A D I N G 31: L E A R N I N G T O B E DEPRESSED 2 4 2 Seligman, M. E. P., & Maier, S. F. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . Failure to escape traumatic shock. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 74, 1-9.

x Contents

R E A D I N G 3 2 : C R O W D I N G I N T O T H E B E H A V I O R A L SINK 2 4 9 Calhoun, J. B. ( 1 9 6 2 ) . Population density and social pathology. Scientific American, 2 0 6 ( 3 ) , 1 3 9 - 1 4 8 .

CHAPTER IX PSYCHOTHERAPY 2 5 8

R E A D I N G 3 3 : C H O O S I N G Y O U R P S Y C H O T H E R A P I S T 2 5 8 Smith, M. L., & Glass, G. V. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. American Psychologist, 32, 7 5 2 - 7 6 0 .

R E A D I N G 34: R E L A X I N G Y O U R FEARS AWAY 2 6 4 Wolpe, J. ( 1 9 6 1 ) . The systematic desensitization treatment of neuroses. Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, 132, 1 8 0 - 2 0 3 .

R E A D I N G 3 5 : P R O J E C T I O N S O F W H O Y O U ARE 271 Rorschach, H. ( 1 9 4 2 ) . Psychodiagnostics: A diagnostic test based on perception. New York: Grune & Stratton.

R E A D I N G 36: P I C T U R E T H I S ! 2 7 8 Murray, H. A. ( 1 9 3 8 ) . Explorations in personality (pp. 5 3 1 - 5 4 5 ) . New York: Oxford University Press.

CHAPTER X SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2 8 6

R E A D I N G 37: A P R I S O N B Y A N Y O T H E R NAME . . . 2 8 7 Zimbardo, P. G. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . The pathology of imprisonment. Society, 9 ( 6 ) , 4 - 8 . Haney, C, Banks, W. C, & Zimbardo, P. G. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . Interpersonal dynamics in a simulated prison. International Journal of Criminology & Penology, 1, 6 9 - 9 7 .

R E A D I N G 38: T H E P O W E R O F C O N F O R M I T Y 2 9 5 Asch, S. E. ( 1 9 5 5 ) . Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American, 193(5), 3 1 - 3 5 .

R E A D I N G 39: T O HELP O R N O T T O HELP 3 0 0 Darley, J. M., & Latané, B. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffu- sion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 3 7 7 - 3 8 3 .

R E A D I N G 4 0 : O B E Y A T A N Y C O S T ? 3 0 8 Milgram, S. ( 1 9 6 3 ) . Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 3 7 1 - 3 7 8 .

A U T H O R INDEX 3 1 8

S U B J E C T INDEX 3 2 2

PREFACE

The publication of this sixth edition of Forty Studies marks t h e 1 8 t h anniversary of its original release. T h e majority of t h e studies included in this edition a r e the same ones that m a d e up a large p a r t of t h e first edition. This d e m o n s t r a t e s

how these l a n d m a r k studies c o n t i n u e to e x e r t their influence over psychologi-

cal thought a n d r e s e a r c h today. T h e s e original studies a n d t h e o n e s that have

b e e n a d d e d over the past 18 years provide a fascinating glimpse into t h e birth

a n d growth of t h e science of psychology, a n d into t h e insights we have a c q u i r e d

into the complexities o f h u m a n n a t u r e .

Many studies o f h u m a n b e h a v i o r have m a d e r e m a r k a b l e a n d lasting im-

pacts on t h e various disciplines that c o m p r i s e t h e vast field of psychology.

T h e f i n d i n g s g e n e r a t e d f r o m these studies have c h a n g e d o u r knowledge o f

h u m a n behavior, a n d they have set t h e stage for c o u n d e s s s u b s e q u e n t p r o -

j e c t s a n d r e s e a r c h p r o g r a m s . E v e n w h e n t h e results o f s o m e o f these pivotal

studies have later b e e n drawn i n t o controversy a n d question, t h e i r effect a n d

influence in a historical c o n t e x t n e v e r diminish. T h e y c o n t i n u e to be c i t e d in

new articles; they c o n t i n u e to be t h e t o p i c of a c a d e m i c discussion; they c o n -

tinue t o f o r m t h e foundation for h u n d r e d s o f t e x t b o o k c h a p t e r s ; a n d they

c o n t i n u e to h o l d a special p l a c e in t h e m i n d s of psychologists.

T h e c o n c e p t for this b o o k o r i g i n a t e d f r o m m y m a n y years o f t e a c h i n g

psychology. Psychology t e x t b o o k s a r e based on key studies that have s h a p e d

t h e s c i e n c e of psychology over its relatively b r i e f history. T e x t b o o k s , however,

seldom give t h e original, c o r e studies t h e a t t e n t i o n they richly d e s e r v e . T h e

original r e s e a r c h processes a n d f i n d i n g s often a r e s u m m a r i z e d a n d diluted t o

t h e point that little o f t h e life a n d e x c i t e m e n t o f t h e discoveries r e m a i n .

S o m e t i m e s , r e s e a r c h results a r e r e p o r t e d in ways t h a t m a y even mislead t h e

r e a d e r a b o u t t h e study's real i m p a c t a n d influence a b o u t what w e know a n d

how we know it. This is in no way a criticism of t h e t e x t b o o k writers w h o work

u n d e r length constraints a n d m u s t m a k e m a n y difficult c h o i c e s a b o u t what

gets included a n d in how m u c h detail. T h e situation is, however, u n f o r t u n a t e ,

b e c a u s e t h e f o u n d a t i o n of all of psychology is scientific r e s e a r c h , a n d

t h r o u g h over a c e n t u r y o f ingenious a n d e l e g a n t studies o u r knowledge a n d

u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f h u m a n behavior have b e e n e x p a n d e d a n d refined t o t h e

a d v a n c e d level of sophistication t h a t exists today.

This b o o k is an a t t e m p t to fill t h e g a p between t h e psychology text-

books a n d t h e r e s e a r c h that m a d e t h e m possible. It is a j o u r n e y t h r o u g h t h e

xi

xii Preface

headline history of psychology. My h o p e is t h a t t h e way t h e 40 c h o s e n studies

a r e p r e s e n t e d will bring every o n e of t h e m b a c k to life so t h a t y o u c a n e x p e r i -

e n c e t h e m for yourself. This b o o k is i n t e n d e d for a n y o n e w h o wishes a

g r e a t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e t r u e r o o t s o f psychology.

C H O O S I N G T H E S T U D I E S

T h e studies i n c l u d e d in this b o o k have b e e n carefully c h o s e n f r o m those

f o u n d in psychology texts a n d j o u r n a l s a n d f r o m those suggested by leading

authorities in t h e m a n y b r a n c h e s of psychology. As t h e studies w e r e selected,

40 s e e m e d to be a realistic n u m b e r b o t h f r o m a historical p o i n t of view a n d in

t e r m s o f length. T h e studies c h o s e n a r e arguably t h e m o s t f a m o u s , t h e m o s t

i m p o r t a n t , or t h e m o s t influential in t h e history of psychology. I use t h e word

arguably b e c a u s e m a n y w h o r e a d this b o o k may wish to dispute s o m e of t h e

c h o i c e s . O n e thing is sure: no single list of 40 studies would satisfy everyone.

However, t h e studies i n c l u d e d h e r e c o n t i n u e t o b e cited m o s t frequently,

stirred u p t h e m o s t controversy when they w e r e published, sparked t h e m o s t

subsequent r e l a t e d r e s e a r c h , o p e n e d new fields o f psychological e x p l o r a t i o n ,

o r c h a n g e d m o s t dramatically o u r knowledge o f h u m a n behavior. T h e s e stud-

ies a r e o r g a n i z e d b y c h a p t e r a c c o r d i n g t o t h e m a j o r psychology b r a n c h e s into

which they best fit: Biology a n d H u m a n Behavior; P e r c e p t i o n a n d Conscious-

ness; L e a r n i n g ; Intelligence, C o g n i t i o n , a n d M e m o r y ; H u m a n Development;

E m o t i o n a n d Motivation; Personality; Psychopathology; Psychotherapy; a n d

Social Psychology.

P R E S E N T I N G T H E S T U D I E S

T h e original studies a r e n o t i n c l u d e d in t h e i r entirety in this b o o k . Instead, I

have discussed a n d s u m m a r i z e d t h e m in a consistent f o r m a t t h r o u g h o u t t h e

b o o k t o p r o m o t e a c l e a r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e studies p r e s e n t e d . E a c h read-

ing c o n t a i n s t h e following:

1. An e x a c t , readily available r e f e r e n c e for w h e r e t h e original study c a n be

f o u n d

2. A b r i e f i n t r o d u c t i o n s u m m a r i z i n g t h e b a c k g r o u n d in t h e field leading

u p t o t h e study a n d t h e r e a s o n s t h e r e s e a r c h e r c a r r i e d o u t t h e p r o j e c t

3 . T h e t h e o r e t i c a l propositions o r hypotheses o n which t h e r e s e a r c h rests

4 . A detailed a c c o u n t o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l design a n d m e t h o d s used t o

c a r r y o u t t h e r e s e a r c h , including, w h e r e a p p r o p r i a t e , w h o t h e partici-

pants w e r e a n d how they w e r e r e c r u i t e d ; d e s c r i p t i o n s o f any a p p a r a t u s

a n d materials used; a n d t h e actual p r o c e d u r e s followed in c a r r y i n g o u t

t h e r e s e a r c h

5. A s u m m a r y of t h e results of t h e study in clear, u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , n o n t e c h -

nical, nonstatistical, n o j a r g o n l a n g u a g e

6 . A n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e findings based o n t h e author's

own discussion in t h e original article

Preface x i i i

N E W T O T H E S I X T H E D I T I O N

This sixth edition of Forty Studies offers n u m e r o u s n o t e w o r t h y a n d substantive

c h a n g e s a n d additions. I have a d d e d two of t h e m o s t influential studies in t h e

history of psychology a b o u t how we per c eiv e t h e world. T h e first is R o b e r t

Fantz's revolutionary discovery of an ingenious m e t h o d to allow us to study

what very y o u n g infants "know" (from 1 9 6 1 ) . T h e s e c o n d , Philip Z i m b a r d o ' s

famous Stanford Prison Study ( f r o m t h e early 1 9 7 0 s ) focuses on t h e powerful

a n d c o n t r o l l i n g forces s o m e situations c a n e x e r t o v e r o u r behavior.

I n addition, t h e R e c e n t Applications sections n e a r t h e e n d o f t h e r e a d -

ings have b e e n u p d a t e d . T h e s e sections sample t h e n u m e r o u s r e c e n t cita-

tions o f t h e 4 0 studies into t h e 21st c e n t u r y . T h e 4 0 studies discussed i n this

book a r e r e f e r r e d to in o v e r 1 0 0 0 r e s e a r c h articles every year! A small sam-

pling of those articles is briefly s u m m a r i z e d t h r o u g h o u t this edition to allow

you to e x p e r i e n c e t h e ongoing influence of these 40 studies that c h a n g e d psy-

chology. All these r e c e n t l y cited studies a r e fully r e f e r e n c e d at t h e e n d of

e a c h r e a d i n g along with o t h e r relevant sources. As you r e a d t h r o u g h t h e m ,

you will be able to a p p r e c i a t e t h e b r e a d t h a n d richness of t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s

still being m a d e by t h e 40 studies t h a t c o m p r i s e this b o o k .

Over the t h r e e years since completing the fifth edition, I have c o n t i n u e d

to enjoy n u m e r o u s conversations with, a n d helpful suggestions from, colleagues

in many b r a n c h e s of psychological r e s e a r c h about potential c h a n g e s in t h e se-

lection of studies for this new edition. Two studies I have for s o m e time consid-

e r e d including have b e e n m e n t i o n e d frequently by fellow researchers, so I have

added them in this edition. E a c h of these two newly i n c o r p o r a t e d studies, in

7 . T h e significance o f t h e study t o t h e f i e l d o f psychology

8 . A b r i e f discussion o f s u p p o r t i v e o r c o n t r a d i c t o r y follow-up r e s e a r c h

f i n d i n g s a n d s u b s e q u e n t q u e s t i o n i n g o r c r i t i c i s m f r o m o t h e r s i n t h e

field

9. A sampling of r e c e n t applications a n d citations of t h e study in o t h e r s '

articles to d e m o n s t r a t e its c o n t i n u i n g influence

10. R e f e r e n c e s for additional a n d u p d a t e d r e a d i n g relating to t h e study

O f t e n , scientists speak i n l a n g u a g e s t h a t a r e n o t easily u n d e r s t o o d

(even b y o t h e r s c i e n t i s t s ) . T h e p r i m a r y g o a l o f this b o o k i s t o m a k e t h e s e

discoveries m e a n i n g f u l a n d a c c e s s i b l e t o t h e r e a d e r a n d t o allow y o u t o e x -

p e r i e n c e t h e e x c i t e m e n t a n d d r a m a o f t h e s e r e m a r k a b l e a n d i m p o r t a n t

discoveries. W h e r e possible a n d a p p r o p r i a t e , I h a v e e d i t e d a n d simplified

s o m e o f t h e studies p r e s e n t e d h e r e f o r e a s e o f r e a d i n g a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g .

However, this has b e e n d o n e carefully, s o t h a t t h e m e a n i n g a n d e l e g a n c e

o f t h e work a r e p r e s e r v e d a n d t h e i m p a c t o f t h e r e s e a r c h i s distilled a n d

clarified.

xiv Preface

t h e i r own significant ways, e x p a n d e d o u r p e r c e p t i o n s o f two v e r y basic as-

p e c t s o f h u m a n n a t u r e a n d a d d e d t o o u r k n o w l e d g e o f t h e c o m p l e x i t y a n d

diversity o f t h e h u m a n e x p e r i e n c e .

O n e of t h e newly a d d e d studies in this e d i t i o n p r o v i d e d a window i n t o

t h e p e r c e p t u a l a n d thinking abilities o f infants. O f c o u r s e , b e h a v i o r a l scien-

tists have known for d e c a d e s t h a t infants' b e h a v i o r s in r e l a t i o n to t h e world

a r o u n d t h e m c h a n g e a n d d e v e l o p quickly i n m a n y ways. B u t j u s t what d o

babies know? H o w d o they think? H o w skilled a r e they a t p e r c e i v i n g a n d

p r o c e s s i n g events in t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t ? You c a n i m a g i n e this is a difficult

r e s e a r c h c h a l l e n g e t o o v e r c o m e b e c a u s e infants c a n n o t talk t o y o u a b o u t

w h a t is g o i n g on in t h e i r b r a i n s . I n s t e a d , r e s e a r c h e r s m u s t infer what in-

fants p e r c e i v e a n d h o w they t h i n k f r o m t h e i r o b s e r v a b l e b e h a v i o r s . I n

e s s e n c e , this was h o w t h e f a m o u s Swiss psychologist, J e a n P i a g e t , w h o is dis-

c u s s e d i n C h a p t e r V o f this b o o k , f o r m e d his t h e o r i e s o f early cognitive de-

v e l o p m e n t i n p r e v e r b a l infants. I n t h e early 1 9 6 0 s , R o b e r t L . F a n t z

d i s c o v e r e d a new way of allowing us to p e e r inside t h e p e r c e p t i o n s of in-

fants: looking at w h a t they a r e l o o k i n g at. It t u r n s o u t t h a t even v e r y y o u n g

infants p r e f e r t o l o o k a t c e r t a i n o b j e c t s o r events o v e r o t h e r s . B y m e a s u r i n g

this behavior, r e f e r r e d to as preferential looking, r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e b e e n able

t o study infants' k n o w l e d g e a n d p e r c e p t i o n i n m a n y a n d v a r i e d c o n t e x t s .

T h i s m e t h o d o l o g y , a l o n g with s o m e e n h a n c e m e n t s t o i t (also p i o n e e r e d b y

F a n t z ) , r e m a i n s today, n e a r l y 5 0 years later, t h e m o s t widely e m p l o y e d t e c h -

n i q u e w h e n psychologists a n d o t h e r s wish t o study t h e p e r c e i v i n g , thinking,

a n d knowing p r o c e s s e s o f infants.

T h e s e c o n d study a d d e d to this new edition is o n e of t h e m o s t well-

known r e s e a r c h u n d e r t a k i n g s in t h e history of psychology. Many would

a r g u e , a n d rightly so, t h a t p e r h a p s it should have b e e n a mainstay of this

b o o k f r c m t h e beginning. It is Philip Z i m b a r d o ' s f a m o u s "Stanford Prison

Study." T h a t said, t h e historical timing is p e r f e c t to i n c l u d e this study now be-

c a u s e a r e n e w e d interest has arisen in this study a n d t h e i n f e r e n c e s drawn

f r o m it o v e r t h e past several years, d u e to t h e high news-profile p r i s o n e r scan-

dals in I r a q a n d various U.S. p r i s o n e r policies relating to t h e "War on T e r r o r . "

In basic psychological theory, two f o r c e s d e t e r m i n e o u r b e h a v i o r in a given

situation: o u r i n t e r n a l , dispositional factors ( t h a t is, w h o we a r e ) a n d t h e in-

fluences of t h e situation in which we a r e behaving. In his simulated prison

study, Z i m b a r d o set o u t t o e x a m i n e how o r d i n a r y people's behavior m i g h t

c h a n g e w h e n p l a c e d in a situation t h a t c a r r i e s with it a g r e a t deal of i n h e r e n t

power, in this case, a prison.

All t h e studies, regardless of vintage, discussed in t h e u p c o m i n g pages

have o n e issue i n c o m m o n : r e s e a r c h ethics. O n e o f t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t build-

ing blocks of psychological s c i e n c e is a strict u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d a d h e r e n c e to

a c l e a r set of professional ethical guidelines in any r e s e a r c h involving h u m a n s

or animals. Let's c o n s i d e r briefly t h e ethical principles social scientists work

diligently to follow as they m a k e t h e i r discoveries.

Preface x v

T H E E T H I C S O F R E S E A R C H I N V O L V I N G H U M A N O R A N I M A L PARTICIPANTS

W i t h o u t subjects, scientific r e s e a r c h is virtually impossible. In physics, t h e

subjects a r e m a t t e r a n d energy; in botany, they a r e plants; in chemistry, they

a r e a t o m s a n d molecules; a n d i n psychology, t h e participants a r e p e o p l e .

S o m e t i m e s , c e r t a i n types o f r e s e a r c h d o n o t p e r m i t t h e use o f h u m a n partici-

pants, so animal subjects a r e substituted. However, typically, t h e u l t i m a t e g o a l

of animal r e s e a r c h is to u n d e r s t a n d h u m a n b e h a v i o r better, n o t j u s t to study

t h e animals themselves. In this book, you will be r e a d i n g a b o u t r e s e a r c h in-

volving b o t h h u m a n a n d a n i m a l subjects. S o m e o f t h e studies m a y c a u s e y o u

t o question the ethics o f t h e r e s e a r c h e r s i n r e g a r d t o t h e p r o c e d u r e s used

with t h e subjects.

W h e n painful or stressful p r o c e d u r e s a r e p a r t of a study, usually t h e

question of ethics is n o t e d in t h e c h a p t e r . However, b e c a u s e this is such a

volatile a n d topical issue, a b r i e f discussion of t h e ethical guidelines followed

by present-day psychologists in all r e s e a r c h is i n c l u d e d h e r e in a d v a n c e of t h e

specific studies described in this book.

Research with H u m a n Participants

T h e A m e r i c a n Psychological Association (APA) has issued strict a n d c l e a r

guidelines that r e s e a r c h e r s must follow when c a r r y i n g o u t e x p e r i m e n t s in-

volving h u m a n participants. A p o r t i o n of t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n to t h o s e guidelines

reads as follows:

Psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm. In their professional actions, psychologists seek to safeguard the welfare and rights of those with whom they interact. . . . When conflicts occur among psychologists' obligations or concerns, they attempt to resolve these conflicts in a responsible fashion that avoids or minimizes harm. . . . Psychologists uphold professional standards of conduct, clarify their professional roles and obliga- tions, accept appropriate responsibility for their behavior, and seek to manage conflicts of interest that could lead to exploitation or h a r m . . . . Psychologists re- spect the dignity and worth of all people, and the rights of individuals to pri- vacy, confidentiality, and self-determination, (excerpted from Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct, 2003; see http://apa.org/ethics).

R e s e a r c h e r s today take g r e a t c a r e to a d h e r e to those principles by fol-

lowing basic ethical principles in c a r r y i n g o u t all studies involving h u m a n

participants. T h e s e principles may be s u m m a r i z e d as follows:

1. Informed consent. A r e s e a r c h e r must explain to potential participants what

the e x p e r i m e n t is about a n d what p r o c e d u r e s will be used so that t h e in-

dividual is able to m a k e an i n f o r m e d decision a b o u t w h e t h e r or n o t to

participate. If the person then a g r e e s to participate, this is called informed

consent. As you will see in this book, sometimes t h e t r u e purposes of an ex-

p e r i m e n t c a n n o t be revealed because this would alter the behavior of t h e

participants a n d c o n t a m i n a t e t h e results. In such cases, when d e c e p t i o n is

used, a subject still must be given a d e q u a t e information for i n f o r m e d

xvi Preface

consent, a n d the portions o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t that a r e hidden must b e

b o t h justifiable based on t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e potential findings a n d re-

vealed to the participants at t h e e n d of their involvement in the study. In

r e s e a r c h involving children or minors, p a r e n t or guardian c o n s e n t is re-

quired a n d t h e s a m e ethical guidelines apply.

2. Freedom to withdraw at any time. P a r t of i n f o r m e d c o n s e n t is t h e principle

t h a t all h u m a n p a r t i c i p a n t s in all r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t s must be aware that

they may withdraw freely f r o m t h e study at any time. This may a p p e a r to

be an u n n e c e s s a r y r u l e , b e c a u s e it would s e e m obvious t h a t any subject

w h o is t o o u n c o m f o r t a b l e with t h e p r o c e d u r e s c a n simply leave. How-

ever, this is n o t always so straightforward. F o r e x a m p l e , u n d e r g r a d u a t e

students a r e often given c o u r s e c r e d i t for participating as participants

in psychological e x p e r i m e n t s . If they feel that withdrawing will influ-

e n c e t h e c r e d i t they n e e d , they may n o t feel free t o d o so. W h e n partici-

pants a r e paid to p a r t i c i p a t e , if they a r e m a d e to feel that their

c o m p l e t i o n of t h e e x p e r i m e n t is a r e q u i r e m e n t for p a y m e n t , this could

p r o d u c e an u n e t h i c a l i n d u c e m e n t to avoid withdrawing if they wish to

do so. To avoid this p r o b l e m , p a r t i c i p a n t s should be given c r e d i t or

paid at t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e p r o c e d u r e just for showing up.

3. Confidentiality. All results based on p a r t i c i p a n t s in e x p e r i m e n t s should

be kept in c o m p l e t e c o n f i d e n c e unless specific a g r e e m e n t s have b e e n

m a d e with t h e participants. This d o e s n o t m e a n that results c a n n o t b e

r e p o r t e d a n d published, but this is d o n e in such a way that individual

d a t a c a n n o t be identified. Often, no identifying i n f o r m a t i o n is even ac-

q u i r e d f r o m participants, a n d all d a t a a r e c o m b i n e d to arrive at average

differences a m o n g g r o u p s .

4. Debriefing and protedion from harm. E x p e r i m e n t e r s have the responsibility to

p r o t e c t their participants f r o m all physical a n d psychological h a r m that

might result from the r e s e a r c h p r o c e d u r e s . Most psychological research

involves m e t h o d s that a r e completely harmless, both during a n d after the

study. However, even seemingly harmless p r o c e d u r e s c a n sometimes pro-

d u c e negative effects, such as frustration, e m b a r r a s s m e n t , or c o n c e r n .

O n e c o m m o n safeguard against those effects is the ethical r e q u i r e m e n t of

debriefing. After participants have c o m p l e t e d an e x p e r i m e n t , especially

o n e involving any f o r m of deception, they should be debriefed. During de-

briefing, t h e t r u e purpose a n d goals of the e x p e r i m e n t a r e explained to

them, a n d they a r e given t h e opportunity to ask any questions about their

experiences. If t h e r e is any possibility of lingering aftereffects from the ex-

periment, the r e s e a r c h e r s should provide participants with c o n t a c t infor-

mation if participants might have any c o n c e r n s in the future.

As y o u r e a d t h r o u g h t h e studies i n c l u d e d in this b o o k , you may find a

few studies t h a t a p p e a r to have violated s o m e of these ethical principles.

T h o s e studies were c a r r i e d o u t long b e f o r e f o r m a l ethical guidelines existed

a n d c o u l d n o t b e r e p l i c a t e d u n d e r today's ethical principles. T h e lack o f

Preface xvii

guidelines, however, d o e s n o t e x c u s e past r e s e a r c h e r s f o r abuses. J u d g m e n t

of those investigators m u s t now be m a d e by e a c h of us individually, a n d we

must l e a r n , as psychologists have, f r o m past mistakes.

R e s e a r c h with A n i m a l Subjects

O n e o f the hottest topics o f discussion inside a n d outside t h e scientific c o m -

munity is t h e question of t h e ethics of animal r e s e a r c h . Animal-rights g r o u p s

a r e growing in n u m b e r a n d a r e b e c o m i n g increasingly vocal a n d militant.

M o r e controversy exists today over animal subjects than h u m a n participants,

probably b e c a u s e animals c a n n o t be p r o t e c t e d , as h u m a n s c a n , with i n f o r m e d

consent, f r e e d o m to withdraw, or debriefing. In addition, t h e m o s t radical ani-

mal rights activists take t h e view that all living things a r e o r d e r e d in value by

their ability to sense pain. In this conceptualization, animals a r e equal in value

to h u m a n s a n d , t h e r e f o r e , any use of animals by h u m a n s is seen as unethical.

This use includes eating a c h i c k e n , wearing leather, a n d owning pets (which,

a c c o r d i n g to s o m e animal-rights activists, is a f o r m of slavery).

A t o n e e n d o f t h e s p e c t r u m , m a n y p e o p l e believe t h a t r e s e a r c h with ani-

mals is i n h u m a n e a n d u n e t h i c a l a n d should be prohibited. However, nearly

all scientists a n d m o s t A m e r i c a n s believe t h a t t h e limited a n d h u m a n e use of

animals in scientific r e s e a r c h is n e c e s s a r y a n d beneficial. Many lifesaving

d r u g s a n d m e d i c a l t e c h n i q u e s have b e e n d e v e l o p e d t h r o u g h t h e use o f ani-

mal e x p e r i m e n t a l subjects. Animals have also often b e e n subjects in psycho-

logical r e s e a r c h to study issues such as depression, brain d e v e l o p m e n t ,

overcrowding, a n d l e a r n i n g processes. T h e p r i m a r y r e a s o n animals a r e used

in r e s e a r c h is that to c a r r y o u t similar r e s e a r c h on h u m a n s clearly would be

u nethi cal. F o r e x a m p l e , suppose you w a n t e d t o study t h e effect o n brain de-

v e l o p m e n t a n d intelligence o f raising infants i n a n e n r i c h e d e n v i r o n m e n t

with m a n y activities a n d toys, versus an i m p o v e r i s h e d e n v i r o n m e n t with little

to d o . To assign h u m a n infants to these different c o n d i t i o n s would simply n o t

be possible. However, m o s t p e o p l e would a g r e e that rats c o u l d be studied

without m a j o r ethical c o n c e r n s to reveal findings potentially i m p o r t a n t to hu-

m a n s (see Reading 2 on r e s e a r c h by Rosenzweig a n d B e n n e t t ) .

T h e APA, in addition to its guidelines on h u m a n p a r t i c i p a n t s , has strict

rules g o v e r n i n g r e s e a r c h with a n i m a l subjects t h a t a r e designed to e n s u r e hu-

m a n e t r e a t m e n t . T h e s e rules r e q u i r e t h a t r e s e a r c h animals r e c e i v e p r o p e r

housing, feeding, cleanliness, a n d h e a l t h c a r e . All u n n e c e s s a r y pain to t h e

animal is prohibited. A p o r t i o n of t h e APA's Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct

in the Care and Use of Animals ( 2 0 0 4 ) reads as follows:

Animals are to be provided with humane care and healthful conditions during their stay in the facility.... Psychologists are encouraged to consider enriching the environments of their laboratory animals and should keep abreast of literature on well-being and enrichment for the species with which they w o r k . . . . When alterna- tive behavioral procedures are available, those that minimize discomfort to the ani- mal should be used. When using aversive conditions, psychologists should adjust

xviii Preface

the parameters of stimulation to levels that appear minimal, though compatible with the aims of the research. Psychologists are encouraged to test painful stimuli on themselves, whenever reasonable, (see http://apa.org/science/ anguide.html).

In this book, several studies involve a n i m a l subjects. In addition to t h e

ethical c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of s u c h r e s e a r c h , difficulties also arise in generalizing

f r o m a n i m a l findings to h u m a n s . T h e s e issues a r e discussed in this b o o k

within e a c h r e a d i n g t h a t includes a n i m a l r e s e a r c h . E a c h individual, w h e t h e r

a r e s e a r c h e r or a s t u d e n t of psychology, m u s t m a k e his or h e r own decisions

a b o u t a n i m a l r e s e a r c h in g e n e r a l a n d t h e justifiability of using animal sub-

j e c t s in any specific instance. If you allow for t h e idea that animal r e s e a r c h is

a c c e p t a b l e u n d e r some c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e n , for e a c h study involving animals

in this book, y o u m u s t d e c i d e if t h e value of t h e study's findings supports t h e

m e t h o d s used.

O n e final n o t e r e l a t e d to this issue involves a d e v e l o p m e n t in animal r e -

s e a r c h t h a t is a r e s p o n s e to public c o n c e r n s a b o u t potential m i s t r e a t m e n t .

T h e city o f C a m b r i d g e , Massachusetts, o n e o f t h e m a j o r r e s e a r c h c e n t e r s o f

t h e world a n d h o m e t o institutions s u c h a s H a r v a r d University a n d t h e Massa-

chusetts Institute o f T e c h n o l o g y ( M I T ) , c r e a t e d t h e position o f C o m m i s -

s i o n e r o f L a b o r a t o r y Animals within t h e C a m b r i d g e H e a l t h D e p a r t m e n t

(see h t t p : / / w w w . c a m b r i d g e p u b l i c h e a l t h . o r g / s e r v i c e s / r e g u l a t o r y - a c t i v i t i e s /

lab-animals/lab-animals-overview.php). This was t h e first such g o v e r n m e n t a l

position i n t h e U n i t e d States. C a m b r i d g e i s h o m e t o 4 4 r e s e a r c h l a b o r a t o r i e s

t h a t h o u s e o v e r 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 animals. T h e c o m m i s s i o n e r ' s c h a r g e i s t o e n s u r e hu-

m a n e a n d p r o p e r t r e a t m e n t o f all a n i m a l subjects i n all aspects o f t h e r e -

search process, from t h e animals' living q u a r t e r s to t h e m e t h o d s used in

administering t h e r e s e a r c h protocols. If a lab is found to be in violation of

Cambridge's strict laws c o n c e r n i n g t h e h u m a n e c a r e of lab animals, the c o m -

missioner is authorized to impose fines of up to $ 3 0 0 p e r day. As of this writing,

only o n e such fine has b e e n imposed; it a m o u n t e d to $ 4 0 , 0 0 0 (for 1 3 3 days in

violation) on a facility that a p p e a r e d to have deliberately disregarded animal

t r e a t m e n t laws (Dr. J u l i e Medley, C o m m i s s i o n e r of L a b o r a t o r y Animals, e-mail,

April 5, 2 0 0 7 ) . In all o t h e r cases, any facility that has b e e n found in violation

willingly a n d quickly c o r r e c t s t h e p r o b l e m . T h e studies you a r e a b o u t to experi-

e n c e in this b o o k have benefited all of h u m a n k i n d in m a n y ways a n d to varying

degrees. T h e history of psychological r e s e a r c h is a relatively short o n e , but it is

b r i m m i n g with t h e r i c h n e s s a n d e x c i t e m e n t o f discovering h u m a n n a t u r e .

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S

I would like to e x p r e s s my s i n c e r e g r a t i t u d e to C h a r l y c e J o n e s Owen,

Publisher, w h o s u p p o r t e d a n d believed in this p r o j e c t f r o m its inception.

Many thanks t o L e a h Jewell, E d i t o r i a l D i r e c t o r o f t h e H u m a n i t i e s Division a t

P e a r s o n P r e n t i c e Hall, for h e r o n g o i n g c o m m i t m e n t t o a n d s u p p o r t o f this

b o o k . I am also very grateful to J e s s i c a Mosher, E d i t o r in C h i e f of Psychology

Preface xix

a t P e a r s o n P r e n t i c e Hall for h e r s u p p o r t a n d c o n t i n u i n g , t a l e n t e d assistance

on this p r o j e c t . I must offer my p e r s o n a l a p p r e c i a t i o n to B r u c e K e n s e l a a r for

l e n d i n g his c o n s i d e r a b l e t a l e n t s i n d e s i g n i n g t h e c o v e r o f this a n d p a s t

editions. T h a n k you to my psychology colleagues in t h e field who have taken

t h e time, interest, a n d effort t o c o m m u n i c a t e t o m e t h e i r c o m m e n t s , sugges-

tions, a n d wisdom relating to this a n d previous editions of Forty Studies. I have

a t t e m p t e d at every o p p o r t u n i t y to i n c o r p o r a t e t h e i r valued insights i n t o

e a c h edition.

To my family, my friends, a n d my students w h o have p a r t i c i p a t e d in t h e

history of this b o o k in so m a n y tangible a n d intangible ways o v e r t h e past 18

years (you know w h o you a r e ) , I e x t e n d my c o n t i n u i n g best wishes a n d h e a r t -

felt thanks.

ROGER R. HOCK

BIOLOGY AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR

R e a d i n g 1 O N E B R A I N O R T W O ?

R e a d i n g 2 M O R E E X P E R I E N C E = B I G G E R B R A I N

R e a d i n g 3 A R E Y O U A " N A T U R A L ? "

R e a d i n g 4 W A T C H O U T F O R T H E V I S U A L C L I F F !

early all general psychology texts begin with chapters relating to the biology of

11 h u m a n behavior. This i s due not simply t o convention but r a t h e r because basic biological processes underlie all behavior. T h e various b r a n c h e s of psychol-

ogy rest, to varying degrees, on this biological foundation. T h e a r e a of psychology

that studies these biological functions is typically called psychobiology or biological

psychology. This field focuses on the actions of your brain a n d nervous system; the

processes of receiving stimulation a n d information from the environment

through your senses; the ways your brain organizes sensory information to c r e a t e

your perceptions of the world; a n d how all of this affects your body a n d behavior.

T h e studies c h o s e n t o r e p r e s e n t this basic c o m p o n e n t o f psychological

r e s e a r c h include a wide r a n g e o f r e s e a r c h a n d a r e a m o n g t h e m o s t influential

a n d m o s t often cited. T h e first study discusses a f a m o u s r e s e a r c h p r o g r a m on

right-brain/left-brain specialization that s h a p e d m u c h o f o u r p r e s e n t knowl-

e d g e a b o u t how t h e brain functions. N e x t is a study t h a t surprised t h e scien-

tific c o m m u n i t y by d e m o n s t r a t i n g how a stimulating "childhood" m i g h t result

in a m o r e highly d e v e l o p e d brain. T h e third study r e p r e s e n t s a f u n d a m e n t a l

c h a n g e i n t h e thinking o f m a n y psychologists a b o u t t h e basic causes o f h u m a n

behavior, personality, a n d social i n t e r a c t i o n — n a m e l y , a new a p p r e c i a t i o n for

the significance of y o u r genes. F o u r t h is t h e invention of t h e f a m o u s visual cliff

m e t h o d of studying infants' abilities to perceive d e p t h . All these studies, a l o n g

with several o t h e r s in this book, also address an issue t h a t u n d e r l i e s a n d c o n -

nects nearly all a r e a s of psychology a n d provides t h e fuel for an o n g o i n g a n d

fascinating debate: t h e n a t u r e - n u r t u r e controversy.

Reading 1: ONE BRAIN OR TWO? Gazzaniga, M. S. (1967). The split brain in man. Scientific American, 217(2), 24-29.

You a r e probably aware t h a t t h e two halves o f y o u r brain a r e n o t t h e s a m e a n d

that they p e r f o r m different functions. F o r e x a m p l e , in g e n e r a l t h e left side of

your brain is responsible for m o v e m e n t in t h e right side of y o u r body, a n d vice 1

2 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

versa. B e y o n d this, t h o u g h , t h e two brain h e m i s p h e r e s a p p e a r to have m u c h

g r e a t e r specialized abilities.

I t has c o m e t o b e r a t h e r c o m m o n knowledge that, for m o s t o f us, t h e left

brain c o n t r o l s o u r ability to use l a n g u a g e while t h e right is involved in spatial

relationships, such as those n e e d e d for artistic activities. Stroke or head-injury

patients w h o suffer d a m a g e to t h e left side of t h e brain will usually lose, to

varying d e g r e e s , t h e i r ability to speak (often this skill r e t u r n s with therapy a n d

t r a i n i n g ) . Many p e o p l e believe t h a t e a c h half, or hemisphere, of y o u r brain may

actually be a c o m p l e t e l y s e p a r a t e m e n t a l system with its own individual abili-

t i e s for learning, r e m e m b e r i n g , perceiving t h e world, a n d feeling e m o t i o n s .

T h e c o n c e p t s underlying this view o f t h e brain rest o n early scientific r e s e a r c h

on t h e effects of splitting t h e brain into two s e p a r a t e h e m i s p h e r e s .

T h a t r e s e a r c h was p i o n e e r e d by R o g e r W. S p e r r y ( 1 9 1 3 - 1 9 9 4 ) , begin-

ning a b o u t 15 years p r i o r to the article e x a m i n e d in this c h a p t e r . In his early

work with animal subjects, S p e r r y m a d e m a n y r e m a r k a b l e discoveries. F o r ex-

a m p l e , in o n e series of studies, cats' brains w e r e surgically a l t e r e d to sever t h e

c o n n e c t i o n between t h e two halves of t h e brain a n d to alter t h e o p t i c n e r v e s so

that t h e left eye transmitted i n f o r m a t i o n only to t h e left h e m i s p h e r e a n d t h e

right eye only to the right h e m i s p h e r e . Following surgery, t h e cats a p p e a r e d to

behave normally a n d exhibited virtually no ill effects. T h e n , with t h e right eye

c o v e r e d , t h e cats l e a r n e d a new behavior, such as walking t h r o u g h a s h o r t maze

to find food. After the cats b e c a m e skilled at m a n e u v e r i n g t h r o u g h t h e maze,

t h e eye c o v e r was shifted to t h e cats' left eyes. Now, w h e n t h e cats were p l a c e d

back in t h e m a z e , their right brains h a d no i d e a w h e r e to t u r n a n d t h e animals

h a d t o r e l e a r n t h e e n t i r e m a z e f r o m t h e beginning.

S p e r r y c o n d u c t e d m a n y r e l a t e d studies over t h e n e x t 3 0 years, a n d i n

1 9 8 1 he received t h e N o b e l Prize for his work on t h e specialized abilities of

t h e two h e m i s p h e r e s o f t h e brain. W h e n his r e s e a r c h e n d e a v o r s t u r n e d t o

h u m a n p a r t i c i p a n t s in t h e early 1 9 6 0 s , he was j o i n e d in his work at t h e Cali-

f o r n i a Institute o f T e c h n o l o g y ( C a l t e c h ) b y M i c h a e l Gazzaniga. A l t h o u g h

S p e r r y is c o n s i d e r e d to be t h e f o u n d e r of split-brain r e s e a r c h , Gazzaniga's ar-

ticle has b e e n c h o s e n h e r e b e c a u s e it is a clear, c o n c i s e s u m m a r y of t h e i r early

collaborative work with h u m a n p a r t i c i p a n t s a n d it, a l o n g with o t h e r related

r e s e a r c h by Gazzaniga, is c i t e d often in psychology texts. Its selection is in no

way i n t e n d e d to o v e r l o o k or overshadow e i t h e r Sperry's leadership in this

field or his g r e a t c o n t r i b u t i o n s . Gazzaniga, in l a r g e p a r t , owes his early r e -

s e a r c h , a n d his discoveries i n t h e a r e a o f h e m i s p h e r i c specialization, t o R o g e r

W . S p e r r y (see Sperry, 1 9 6 8 ; P u e n t e , 1 9 9 5 ) .

T o u n d e r s t a n d split-brain r e s e a r c h , s o m e knowledge o f h u m a n physiol-

ogy is r e q u i r e d . T h e two h e m i s p h e r e s of y o u r brain a r e in c o n s t a n t c o m m u n i -

cation with o n e a n o t h e r via t h e corpus callosum, a s t r u c t u r e m a d e up of a b o u t

2 0 0 million n e r v e fibers ( F i g u r e 1-1). If y o u r c o r p u s callosum is cut, this m a j o r

line of c o m m u n i c a t i o n is disrupted, a n d t h e two halves of y o u r brain must t h e n

function independently. If we want to study e a c h half of your brain separately,

all we n e e d to do is surgically sever y o u r c o r p u s callosum.

Reading 1 One Brain or Two?

C o r p u s C a l l o s u m

FIGURE 1-1 The Corpus

Callosum. (Getty Images, Inc.)

B u t c a n scientists surgically divide t h e brains o f h u m a n s for r e s e a r c h

purposes? T h a t sounds m o r e like a F r a n k e n s t e i n movie t h a n real s c i e n c e ! O b -

viously, r e s e a r c h ethics would n e v e r allow such drastic m e t h o d s simply for t h e

p u r p o s e of studying t h e specialized abilities of t h e brain's two h e m i s p h e r e s .

However, in t h e late 1 9 5 0 s , t h e field of m e d i c i n e p r o v i d e d psychologists with a

g o l d e n opportunity. I n s o m e p e o p l e with very r a r e a n d very e x t r e m e cases o f

u n c o n t r o l l a b l e epilepsy, seizures c o u l d be greatly r e d u c e d or virtually elimi-

n a t e d by surgically severing t h e c o r p u s callosum. This o p e r a t i o n was ( a n d is)

successful, as a last r e s o r t , for those patients w h o c a n n o t be h e l p e d by any

o t h e r m e a n s . W h e n this article was written i n 1 9 6 6 , 1 0 such o p e r a t i o n s h a d

b e e n u n d e r t a k e n , a n d four o f t h e patients c o n s e n t e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n e x a m i -

nation a n d testing by S p e r r y a n d Gazzaniga to d e t e r m i n e how t h e i r p e r c e p -

tual a n d intellectual skills were affected by this surgical t r e a t m e n t .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s wanted t o e x p l o r e t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e two halves o f t h e

h u m a n brain a r e able to function independently, as well as w h e t h e r they have

s e p a r a t e a n d u n i q u e abilities. If t h e i n f o r m a t i o n traveling between t h e two

4 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

halves of y o u r brain is i n t e r r u p t e d , would t h e right side of y o u r body suddenly

be u n a b l e to c o o r d i n a t e with t h e left? If l a n g u a g e is c o n t r o l l e d by t h e left side

of t h e brain, how would y o u r ability to speak a n d u n d e r s t a n d words be af-

f e c t e d by this surgery? W o u l d thinking a n d r e a s o n i n g processes exist in b o t h

halves separately? If t h e brain is really two s e p a r a t e brains, would a p e r s o n be

c a p a b l e o f functioning n o r m a l l y w h e n these two brains a r e n o l o n g e r able t o

c o m m u n i c a t e ? C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t we r e c e i v e sensory input f r o m b o t h t h e right

a n d t h e left brains, how would t h e senses of vision, h e a r i n g , a n d t o u c h be af-

fected? S p e r r y a n d Gazzaniga a t t e m p t e d t o answer these a n d m a n y o t h e r

questions in t h e i r studies of split-brain individuals.

METHOD T h e r e s e a r c h e r s d e v e l o p e d t h r e e types o f tests t o e x p l o r e a wide r a n g e o f m e n -

tal a n d p e r c e p t u a l capabilities o f t h e patients. O n e was designed t o e x a m i n e

visual abilities. T h e y devised a t e c h n i q u e t h a t allowed a p i c t u r e of an object, a

w o r d , o r p a r t s o f words t o b e t r a n s m i t t e d only t o t h e visual a r e a (called a f i e l d )

in either t h e right or left brain h e m i s p h e r e , b u t n o t to b o t h . Normally, b o t h of

y o u r eyes s e n d i n f o r m a t i o n t o b o t h sides o f y o u r brain. However, with e x a c t

p l a c e m e n t of items or words in f r o n t of you, a n d with y o u r eyes fixed on a spe-

cific point, i m a g e s c a n b e fed t o t h e r i g h t o r t h e left visual f i e l d o f y o u r brain

independently.

A n o t h e r testing situation was d e s i g n e d for tactile ( t o u c h ) stimulation.

P a r t i c i p a n t s c o u l d feel, b u t n o t see, an object, a block letter, or even a word in

c u t o u t b l o c k letters. T h e a p p a r a t u s consisted of a s c r e e n with a space u n d e r it

for t h e p a r t i c i p a n t t o r e a c h t h r o u g h a n d t o u c h t h e items without being able

t o see t h e m . T h e visual a n d t h e tactile devices c o u l d b e used simultaneously s o

that, for e x a m p l e , a p i c t u r e o f a p e n c o u l d b e p r o j e c t e d t o o n e side o f t h e

brain a n d t h e s a m e o b j e c t c o u l d b e s e a r c h e d for b y e i t h e r h a n d a m o n g vari-

o u s objects b e h i n d t h e s c r e e n (see F i g u r e 1 - 2 ) .

FIGURE 1-2 A typical visual testing device for split-brain participants.

Reading 1 One Brain or Two? 5

Testing a u d i t o r y abilities was s o m e w h a t trickier. W h e n s o u n d e n t e r s ei-

t h e r o f y o u r ears, sensations a r e sent t o b o t h sides o f y o u r b r a i n . T h e r e f o r e , i t

is n o t possible to limit a u d i t o r y input to only o n e side of t h e brain even in

split-brain patients. However, it is possible to limit t h e response to such input to

o n e brain h e m i s p h e r e . H e r e is how this was d o n e : I m a g i n e that several c o m -

m o n objects (a s p o o n , a p e n , a m a r b l e ) a r e p l a c e d into a c l o t h bag a n d you

a r e then asked, verbally, to find c e r t a i n items by t o u c h . You would probably

have no trouble doing so. If you p l a c e y o u r left h a n d in t h e bag, it is being

c o n t r o l l e d by t h e right side of y o u r brain, a n d vice versa. Do you think e i t h e r

side of y o u r brain c o u l d do this task a l o n e ? As you will see in a m o m e n t , b o t h

halves of t h e brain a r e n o t equally c a p a b l e of r e s p o n d i n g to this a u d i t o r y task.

W h a t if you a r e n o t asked for specific objects b ut a r e asked simply to r e a c h

into t h e bag a n d identify objects by t o u c h ? Again, this would n o t be difficult

for you, bu t it would be quite difficult for a split-brain patient.

Gazzaniga c o m b i n e d all these testing t e c h n i q u e s to reveal s o m e fascinat-

ing findings a b o u t how t h e brain functions.

R E S U L T S

First, you should know that following this radical brain surgery, t h e patients'

intelligence level, personality, typical e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s , a n d so on w e r e rel-

atively u n c h a n g e d . T h e y w e r e very happy a n d relieved t h a t they w e r e now f r e e

of seizures. Gazzaniga r e p o r t e d that o n e patient, while still g r o g g y f r o m

surgery, j o k e d that he h a d "a splitting h e a d a c h e . " W h e n testing b e g a n , how-

ever, these participants d e m o n s t r a t e d m a n y unusual m e n t a l abilities.

Visual Abilities

O n e of t h e first tests involved a b o a r d with a h o r i z o n t a l r o w of lights. W h e n

a p a t i e n t sat in f r o n t of this b o a r d a n d s t a r e d at a p o i n t in t h e m i d d l e of t h e

lights, t h e bulbs would flash a c r o s s b o t h t h e r i g h t a n d left visual fields. How-

ever, w h e n t h e p a t i e n t s w e r e asked to e x p l a i n w h a t they saw, they said t h a t

only t h e lights o n t h e r i g h t side o f t h e b o a r d h a d flashed. N e x t w h e n t h e r e -

s e a r c h e r s flashed only t h e lights on t h e left side of t h e visual field, t h e pa-

tients c l a i m e d to have seen n o t h i n g . A logical c o n c l u s i o n f r o m t h e s e

f i n d i n g s was t h a t t h e r i g h t side o f t h e b r a i n was blind. T h e n a n a m a z i n g

thing h a p p e n e d . T h e lights w e r e flashed a g a i n , only this t i m e t h e p a t i e n t s

w e r e asked t o p o i n t t o t h e lights t h a t h a d flashed. A l t h o u g h they h a d said

they only saw t h e lights on t h e right, they p o i n t e d to all t h e lights in b o t h vi-

sual f i e l d s . Using this m e t h o d o f p o i n t i n g , i t was f o u n d t h a t b o t h halves o f

t h e brain h a d seen t h e lights a n d w e r e equally skilled in visual p e r c e p t i o n .

T h e i m p o r t a n t p o i n t h e r e i s t h a t w h e n t h e p a t i e n t s failed t o say t h a t they

h a d seen all t h e lights, i t was n o t b e c a u s e they d i d n ' t see t h e m b u t b e c a u s e

t h e c e n t e r for s p e e c h i s l o c a t e d i n t h e b r a i n ' s left h e m i s p h e r e . I n o t h e r

words, for you to say y o u saw s o m e t h i n g , t h e o b j e c t h a s to have b e e n s e e n by

t h e left side o f y o u r b r a i n .

6 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

Tactile Abilities

You c a n t r y this test yourself. P u t y o u r h a n d s b e h i n d y o u r back. T h e n have

s o m e o n e p l a c e familiar objects (a s p o o n , a p e n , a book, a w a t c h ) in e i t h e r

y o u r right or y o u r left h a n d a n d see if you c a n identify t h e object. You would

n o t find this task to be very difficult, would you? This is basically what S p e r r y

a n d Gazzaniga did with t h e split-brain patients. W h e n an o b j e c t was p l a c e d in

t h e right h a n d in such a way t h a t t h e p a t i e n t c o u l d n o t see or h e a r it, messages

a b o u t t h e o b j e c t would travel to t h e left h e m i s p h e r e a n d t h e p a t i e n t was able

to n a m e t h e o b j e c t a n d d e s c r i b e it a n d its uses. However, when t h e same ob-

j e c t s w e r e p l a c e d i n t h e left h a n d ( c o n n e c t e d t o t h e right h e m i s p h e r e ) , t h e

patients c o u l d n o t n a m e t h e m or d e s c r i b e t h e m in any way. B u t did t h e pa-

tients know in t h e i r right brain what the o b j e c t was? To find out, t h e re-

s e a r c h e r s asked t h e participants to m a t c h t h e o b j e c t in t h e i r left h a n d

(without seeing it, r e m e m b e r ) to a g r o u p of various objects p r e s e n t e d to

t h e m . T h i s they c o u l d do as easily as y o u or I c o u l d . Again, this places verbal

ability in t h e left h e m i s p h e r e of t h e brain. K e e p in m i n d t h a t t h e r e a s o n you

a r e able to n a m e u n s e e n objects in y o u r left h a n d is t h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n from

t h e r i g h t side of y o u r brain is transmitted via t h e c o r p u s callosum to t h e left

side, w h e r e y o u r c e n t e r for l a n g u a g e says, "That's a spoon!"

Visual Plus Tactile Tests

C o m b i n i n g these two types of tests p r o v i d e d s u p p o r t for t h e p r e c e d i n g find-

ings a n d also offered additional interesting results. If p a r t i c i p a n t s were shown

a p i c t u r e o f a n o b j e c t t o t h e right h e m i s p h e r e only, they w e r e u n a b l e t o n a m e

it or d e s c r i b e it. In fact, they m i g h t display no verbal r e s p o n s e at all or even

d e n y t h a t anything h a d b e e n p r e s e n t e d . However, if t h e patients were allowed

to r e a c h u n d e r t h e s c r e e n with t h e i r left h a n d (still using only t h e right hemi-

s p h e r e ) a n d t o u c h a selection of objects, they w e r e always able to find the o n e

t h a t h a d b e e n p r e s e n t e d visually.

T h e right h e m i s p h e r e c a n think a b o u t a n d analyze objects as well. Gaz-

zaniga r e p o r t e d t h a t w h e n t h e right h e m i s p h e r e was shown a p i c t u r e of an

i t e m s u c h as a c i g a r e t t e , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s c o u l d t o u c h 10 objects b e h i n d the

s c r e e n , all of which did n o t i n c l u d e a c i g a r e t t e , a n d select an o b j e c t that was

m o s t closely r e l a t e d t o t h e i t e m p i c t u r e d — i n this case, a n ashtray. H e went o n

t o explain:

Oddly enough, however, even after their correct response, and while they were holding the ashtray in their left hand, they were unable to name or describe the object or the picture of the cigarette. Evidently, the left hemisphere was com- pletely divorced, in perception and knowledge, from the right, (p. 26)

O t h e r tests w e r e c o n d u c t e d t o s h e d additional light o n t h e language-process-

ing abilities o f t h e r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e . O n e v e r y f a m o u s , ingenious, a n d reveal-

ing use of t h e visual a p p a r a t u s c a m e w h e n t h e w o r d HEART was p r o j e c t e d to

t h e patients so t h a t HE was sent to t h e right visual field a n d ART was sent to t h e

left. Now, keeping in m i n d (your c o n n e c t e d m i n d ) t h e functions of the two

Reading 1 One Brain or Two? 7

h e m i s p h e r e s , what d o you think t h e patients verbally r e p o r t e d seeing? I f y o u

said ART, you were c o r r e c t . However, a n d h e r e is t h e revealing p a r t , w h e n t h e

participants were p r e s e n t e d with two c a r d s with t h e words HE a n d ART p r i n t e d

on t h e m a n d asked to p o i n t with t h e left h a n d to t h e w o r d they h a d seen, they

all p o i n t e d to HE! This d e m o n s t r a t e d that t h e right h e m i s p h e r e is able to c o m -

p r e h e n d l a n g u a g e , a l t h o u g h it d o e s so in a different way f r o m t h e left: in a

nonverbal way.

T h e a u d i t o r y tests c o n d u c t e d with t h e patients p r o d u c e d similar results.

W h e n patients were asked to r e a c h with t h e i r left h a n d i n t o a g r a b bag h i d d e n

from view a n d pull o u t c e r t a i n specific objects (a watch, a m a r b l e , a c o m b , a

c o i n ) , they h a d n o t r o u b l e . This d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t t h e right h e m i s p h e r e was

c o m p r e h e n d i n g l a n g u a g e . It was even possible to d e s c r i b e a r e l a t e d a s p e c t of

an item with t h e s a m e a c c u r a t e results. An e x a m p l e given by Gazzaniga was

when t h e patients were asked to find in a g r a b bag full of plastic fruit "the fruit

monkeys like best," they retrieved a b a n a n a . Or w h e n told "Sunkist sells a lot

o f t h e m , " they pulled o u t a n o r a n g e . However, i f these s a m e p i e c e s o f fruit

were p l a c e d o u t of view in t h e patients' left h a n d , they were u n a b l e to say what

they were. In o t h e r words, when a verbal r e s p o n s e was r e q u i r e d , t h e right

h e m i s p h e r e was u n a b l e to speak.

O n e last e x a m p l e of this a m a z i n g difference between t h e two h e m i -

spheres involved plastic block letters on t h e table b e h i n d t h e s c r e e n . W h e n

patients were asked to spell various words by feel with t h e left h a n d , they h a d

an easy time doing so. E v e n if t h r e e or f o u r letters t h a t spelled specific words

were p l a c e d b e h i n d t h e s c r e e n , they w e r e able, left-handed, t o a r r a n g e t h e m

c o r r e c t l y into words. However, immediately after c o m p l e t i n g this task, t h e par-

ticipants c o u l d n o t n a m e t h e w o r d they h a d j u s t spelled. Clearly, t h e left h e m i -

s p h e r e of t h e brain is s u p e r i o r to t h e right for s p e e c h (in s o m e left-handed

p e o p l e , this is r e v e r s e d ) . B u t in what skills, if any, d o e s t h e r i g h t h e m i s p h e r e

e x c e l ? S p e r r y a n d Gazzaniga f o u n d in this early work t h a t visual tasks involv-

ing spatial relationships a n d shapes were p e r f o r m e d with g r e a t e r proficiency

by the left h a n d (even t h o u g h these patients w e r e all r i g h t - h a n d e d ) . As c a n be

seen in F i g u r e 1-3, participants w h o c o p i e s t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l drawings (using

t h e pencil b e h i n d t h e s c r e e n ) w e r e m u c h m o r e successful w h e n using t h e left

h a n d .

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s wanted t o e x p l o r e e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s o f split-brain pa-

tients. While p e r f o r m i n g visual e x p e r i m e n t s , S p e r r y a n d Gazzaniga suddenly

flashed a p i c t u r e of a n u d e w o m a n to e i t h e r t h e left or right h e m i s p h e r e . In

o n e instance, when this p i c t u r e was shown to t h e left h e m i s p h e r e of a f e m a l e

patient:

She laughed and verbally identified the picture of a nude. When it was later pre- sented to the right hemisphere, she said . . . she saw nothing, but almost imme- diately a sly smile spread over her face and she began to chuckle. Asked what she was laughing at, she said: "I don't know . . . nothing . . . oh—that funny ma- chine." Although the right hemisphere could not describe what it had seen, the sight nevertheless elicited an emotional response like the one evoked in the left hemisphere, (p. 29)

8 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

FIGURE 1-3 Drawings made by split-brain patients. (Adapted

from p. 2 7 , " T h e Split Brain in Man," by Michael S. Gazzaniga.)

D I S C U S S I O N

T h e overall c o n c l u s i o n drawn f r o m t h e r e s e a r c h r e p o r t e d in this article was

t h a t two different b r a i n s exist within e a c h p e r s o n ' s c r a n i u m , e a c h with c o m -

p l e x abilities. Gazzaniga n o t e s t h e possibility t h a t if o u r brain is really two

brains, t h e n p e r h a p s we have t h e potential to p r o c e s s twice as m u c h informa-

tion if t h e two halves a r e divided. I n d e e d , s o m e r e s e a r c h e v i d e n c e suggests

t h a t split-brain patients have t h e ability to p e r f o r m two cognitive tasks as fast

a s a n o r m a l p e r s o n c a n c a r r y o u t o n e .

S I G N I F I C A N C E O F F I N D I N G S

T h e s e findings a n d subsequent r e s e a r c h c a r r i e d o u t by Sperry, Gazzaniga, a n d

o t h e r s w e r e e x t r e m e l y significant a n d far-reaching. T h e y d e m o n s t r a t e d that

t h e two halves of y o u r brain have m a n y specialized skills a n d functions. Your

left brain is "better" at speaking, writing, m a t h e m a t i c a l calculation, a n d read-

ing, a n d it is t h e p r i m a r y c e n t e r for l a n g u a g e . Y o u r right h e m i s p h e r e , however,

possesses superior capabilities for recognizing faces, solving p r o b l e m s involv-

ing spatial relationships, symbolic reasoning, a n d artistic activities. In t h e years

EXAMPLE LEFT HAND RIGHT HAND

Reading 1 One Brain or Two ? 9

since S p e r r y a n d Gazzaniga's "split-brain" discoveries, psychobiological r e -

s e a r c h e r s have c o n t i n u e d t o u n c o v e r t h e a m a z i n g c o m p l e x i t i e s o f t h e h u m a n

brain. O u r brains a r e far m o r e divided a n d c o m p a r t m e n t a l i z e d than m e r e l y

two hemispheres. We now know that a multitude of specific s t r u c t u r e s within

the brain serve very specialized cognitive a n d behavioral functions.

O u r i n c r e a s e d knowledge o f t h e specialized f u n c t i o n i n g o f t h e brain al-

lows us to treat victims of stroke or h e a d injury m o r e effectively. By knowing

t h e location of t h e d a m a g e , we c a n p r e d i c t what deficits a r e likely to exist as a

patient recovers. T h r o u g h this knowledge, therapists c a n e m p l o y a p p r o p r i a t e

r e l e a r n i n g a n d rehabilitation strategies to h e l p patients r e c o v e r as fully a n d

quickly as possible.

Gazzaniga a n d Sperry, after years of c o n t i n u o u s work in this a r e a , sug-

gested that e a c h h e m i s p h e r e of your brain really is a m i n d of its own. In a later

study, split-brain patients were tested on m u c h m o r e c o m p l e x p r o b l e m s than

have b e e n discussed h e r e . O n e question asked was "What profession would you

choose?" A male patient verbally (left h e m i s p h e r e ) r e s p o n d e d that he would

c h o o s e to be a draftsman, but his left h a n d (right h e m i s p h e r e ) spelled, by t o u c h

in block letters, automobile racer (Gazzaniga & L e D o u x , 1 9 7 8 ) . Gazzaniga has

taken this t h e o r y a step further. He has p r o p o s e d that even in p e o p l e whose

brains a r e n o r m a l a n d intact, the two hemispheres may n o t be in c o m p l e t e c o m -

munication (Gazzaniga, 1 9 8 5 ) . F o r e x a m p l e , i f certain bits o f information, such

as those forming an e m o t i o n , a r e n o t stored in a linguistic f o r m a t , the left hemi-

sphere may n o t have access to it. T h e result of this is that you may feel sad a n d

not be able to say why. As this is an u n c o m f o r t a b l e cognitive d i l e m m a , the left

h e m i s p h e r e may try to find a verbal reason to explain the sadness (after all, lan-

guage is its main j o b ) . However, because your left h e m i s p h e r e does n o t have all

the necessary data, its explanation may actually be wrong!

C R I T I C I S M S

T h e findings f r o m t h e split-brain studies c a r r i e d o u t over t h e years by Sperry,

Gazzaniga, a n d o t h e r s have rarely b e e n disputed. T h e m a i n body o f criticism

a b o u t this r e s e a r c h has focused instead on t h e way t h e i d e a of right- a n d left-

brain specialization has filtered down to p o p u l a r c u l t u r e a n d t h e m e d i a .

A widely believed myth states t h a t s o m e p e o p l e a r e m o r e right-brained or

m o r e left-brained, o r that o n e side o f y o u r brain n e e d s t o b e d e v e l o p e d i n o r d e r

for you to improve c e r t a i n skills. J e r r e Levy, a psychobiologist at t h e University

of C h i c a g o , has b e e n in t h e f o r e f r o n t of scientists trying to dispel t h e n o t i o n

that we have two separately functioning brains. She claims that it is precisely

b e c a u s e e a c h h e m i s p h e r e has s e p a r a t e functions t h a t they must i n t e g r a t e

their abilities instead of separating t h e m , as is c o m m o n l y believed. T h r o u g h

such integration, y o u r brain is able to p e r f o r m in ways that a r e g r e a t e r t h a n

a n d different f r o m t h e abilities of e i t h e r side a l o n e .

W h e n you r e a d a story, for e x a m p l e , y o u r right h e m i s p h e r e is specializ-

ing in e m o t i o n a l c o n t e n t ( h u m o r , p a t h o s ) , picturing visual descriptions, keep-

ing track of t h e story s t r u c t u r e as a whole, a n d a p p r e c i a t i n g artistic writing

10 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

style ( s u c h as t h e use of m e t a p h o r s ) . W h i l e all this is h a p p e n i n g , your left

h e m i s p h e r e is u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e written words, deriving m e a n i n g from t h e

c o m p l e x relationships a m o n g words a n d s e n t e n c e s , a n d translating words

i n t o t h e i r p h o n e t i c sounds s o t h a t they c a n b e u n d e r s t o o d a s language. T h e

r e a s o n you a r e able to r e a d , u n d e r s t a n d , a n d a p p r e c i a t e a story is that y o u r

brain functions as a single, i n t e g r a t e d s t r u c t u r e (Levy, 1 9 8 5 ) .

In fact, Levy explains t h a t no h u m a n activity uses only o n e side of the

b r a i n . T h e p o p u l a r myths a r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s a n d wishes, n o t t h e observa-

tions of scientists. N o r m a l p e o p l e have n o t h a l f a brain, n o r two brains, but

o n e gloriously differentiated brain, with e a c h h e m i s p h e r e c o n t r i b u t i n g its

specialized abilities" (Levy, 1 9 8 5 , p . 4 4 ) .

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

T h e c o n t i n u i n g influence o f t h e split-brain r e s e a r c h b y S p e r r y a n d Gazzaniga

e c h o e s t h e q u o t e f r o m Levy. A review of r e c e n t medical a n d psychological lit-

e r a t u r e reveals n u m e r o u s articles in various fields referring to t h e early work

a n d m e t h o d o l o g y of R o g e r Sperry, as well as to m o r e r e c e n t findings by

Gazzaniga a n d his associates. F o r e x a m p l e , a study from 1 9 9 8 c o n d u c t e d in

F r a n c e ( H o m m e t & Biliard, 1 9 9 8 ) has questioned t h e very foundations o f the

S p e r r y a n d Gazzaniga studies—namely, that severing t h e c o r p u s callosum ac-

tually divides t h e h e m i s p h e r e s of t h e brain. T h e F r e n c h study found that chil-

d r e n who were b o r n without a c o r p u s callosum (a r a r e brain m a l f o r m a t i o n )

d e m o n s t r a t e d that i n f o r m a t i o n was being transmitted between their brain

h e m i s p h e r e s . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s c o n c l u d e d that significant c o n n e c t i o n s o t h e r

t h a n t h e c o r p u s callosum m u s t exist in these c h i l d r e n . W h e t h e r such subcorti-

cal c o n n e c t i o n s a r e i n d e e d p r e s e n t in split-brain individuals r e m a i n s unclear.

L a t e r that same year, a study was published by a team of neuropsychologists,

including Gazzaniga, from several prestigious r e s e a r c h institutions in the United

States (University of Texas, Stanford, Yale, a n d D a r t m o u t h ) . T h e study d e m o n -

strated that split-brain patients may routinely perceive t h e world differently from

t h e rest of us (Parsons, Gabrieli, Phelps, & Gazzaniga, 1 9 9 8 ) . T h e researchers

found that when participants were asked to identify whether drawings presented

to only o n e brain hemisphere were drawn by right- or left-handed people, the

split-brain patients were able to do so correctly only when the handedness of the

artist was t h e opposite oi the h e m i s p h e r e to which t h e picture was projected. Nor-

mal c o n t r o l subjects were c o r r e c t regardless of which h e m i s p h e r e "saw" the draw-

ings. This implies that c o m m u n i c a t i o n between your brain hemispheres is

necessary for imagining or simulating in your m i n d t h e movements of o t h e r s —

that is, "putting yourself in their place" to perceive their actions correctly.

R e s e a r c h e r s c o n t i n u e t o e x p l o r e t h e i d e a t h a t o u r two brain h e m i s p h e r e s

have s e p a r a t e , yet distinct, functions a n d influences. O n e s u c h study ( M o r t o n ,

2 0 0 3 ) d e m o n s t r a t e d how y o u r d o m i n a n t h e m i s p h e r e m a y lead you toward spe-

cific interests a n d professions. M o r t o n ' s r e s e a r c h m a d e two discoveries in this

r e g a r d . Using a special written test called T h e Best H a n d Test," which m e a -

sures hemispheriáty ( w h e t h e r a p e r s o n is right- or left-brain o r i e n t e d ) , M o r t o n

found that a m o n g 4 0 0 students e n r o l l e d in first-year, g e n e r a l college courses,

Reading 2 More Experience = Bigger Brain 11

5 6 % were left-brain oriented. However, when t h e same m e t h o d s were applied to

1 8 0 students in various, specialized upper-level courses, t h e r a n g e of left brain stu-

dents r a n g e d from 3 8 % to 6 5 % . This difference indicated that something about

a person's brain hemispheres was associated with spreading students o u t over a

variety of college degrees a n d interests. Second, a n d m o r e revealing, M o r t o n em-

ployed the same m e t h o d in determining the hemispheric orientation of m e m -

bers of various professions in university settings. T h e findings indicated that

hemispheric specialization appears to be predictive of professional choices. F o r

e x a m p l e , a m o n g biochemists M o r t o n found that 8 3 % were left-brain oriented,

while a m o n g a s t r o n o m e r s only 2 9 % showed a left-brain p r e f e r e n c e (p. 3 1 9 ) . You

can see how this would make sense in relation to S p e r r y a n d Gazzaniga's work.

Biology and chemistry rely m o r e heavily on linguistic abilities, whereas as-

t r o n o m e r s must have g r e a t e r abilities in spatial relationships ( n o pun i n t e n d e d ) .

C O N C L U S I O N

S o m e have carried this, seperate-brain idea a step further a n d applied it to s o m e

psychological disorders, such as dissociative, multiple personality disorder (e.g.,

Schiffer, 1 9 9 6 ) . T h e idea behind this notion is that in s o m e people with intact,

"nonsplit" brains, the right h e m i s p h e r e may be able to function at a greater-than-

n o r m a l level of i n d e p e n d e n c e from the left, a n d it may even take c o n t r o l of a

person's consciousness for periods of time. Is it possible that multiple personality

disorder might be the expression of hidden personalities c o n t a i n e d in o u r right

hemispheres? It's something to think a b o u t . . . with both of your hemispheres.

Gazzaniga, M. S. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . The sodal brain. New York: Basic Books. Gazzaniga, M. S., & L e d o u x . J . E. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The integrated mind. New York: Plenum Press. Hommet, C, & Biliard, C. ( 1 9 9 8 ) . Corpus callosum syndrome in children. Neurochirurgie, 44(1),

1 1 0 - 1 1 2 . Levy,J. ( 1 9 8 5 , May). Right brain, left brain: Fact and fiction. Psychology Today, 4 2 - 4 4 . Morton, B. E. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Line bisection-based hernisphericity estimates of university students and

professionals: Evidence of sorting during higher education and career selection. Brain and Cognition, 52(3), 3 1 9 - 3 2 5 .

Parsons, L., Gabrieli.J., Phelps, E., & Gazzaniga, M. ( 1 9 9 8 ) . Cerebrally lateralized mental repre- sentations of hand shape and movement. Neuroscience, 18(16), 6539—6548.

Puente, A. E. ( 1 9 9 5 ) . Roger Wolcott Sperry ( 1 9 1 3 - 1 9 9 4 ) . American Psychologist, 5 0 ( 1 1 ) , 9 4 0 - 9 4 1 . Schiffer, F. ( 1 9 9 6 ) . Cognitive ability of the right-hemisphere: Possible contributions to psycholog-

ical function. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 4 ( 3 ) , 1 2 6 - 1 3 8 . Sperry, R. W. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . Hemisphere disconnection and unity in conscious awareness. American Psy-

chologist, 23, 7 2 3 - 7 3 3 .

Reading 2: MORE EXPERIENCE = BIGGER BRAIN Rosenzweig, M. R., Bennett, E. L, & Diamond, M. C. (1972). Brain changes in

response to experience. Scientific American, 226(2), 22-29.

If you were to e n t e r t h e baby's r o o m in a typical A m e r i c a n middle-class h o m e

today, you would probably see a c r i b full of stuffed animals a n d various c o l o r -

ful toys dangling directly over or within r e a c h of t h e infant. S o m e of these toys

12 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

m a y light u p , m o v e , play music, or do all t h r e e . W h a t do you suppose is t h e

p a r e n t s ' r e a s o n i n g b e h i n d providing infants with so m u c h to see a n d do?

Aside f r o m t h e fact t h a t babies s e e m to enjoy a n d r e s p o n d positively to these

toys, m o s t p a r e n t s ' believe, w h e t h e r they verbalize it or not, that c h i l d r e n

n e e d a stimulating e n v i r o n m e n t for o p t i m a l intellectual d e v e l o p m e n t a n d

brain growth.

T h e question o f w h e t h e r c e r t a i n e x p e r i e n c e s p r o d u c e physical c h a n g e s

i n t h e brain has b e e n a t o p i c o f c o n j e c t u r e a n d r e s e a r c h a m o n g p h i l o s o p h e r s

a n d scientists for c e n t u r i e s . I n 1 7 8 5 , V i n c e n z o M a l a c a r n e , a n Italian

a n a t o m i s t , studied pairs o f dogs f r o m t h e s a m e litter a n d pairs o f birds f r o m

t h e s a m e b a t c h e s o f eggs. F o r e a c h pair, h e would train o n e p a r t i c i p a n t e x t e n -

sively o v e r a l o n g p e r i o d of t i m e while t h e o t h e r would be equally well c a r e d

for b u t u n t r a i n e d . He discovered later, in autopsies of t h e animals, that the

b r a i n s o f t h e t r a i n e d animals a p p e a r e d m o r e c o m p l e x , with a g r e a t e r n u m b e r

of folds a n d fissures. However, this line of r e s e a r c h was, for unknown reasons,

d i s c o n t i n u e d . In t h e late 1 9 t h c e n t u r y , a t t e m p t s were m a d e to relate t h e cir-

c u m f e r e n c e o f t h e h u m a n h e a d with t h e a m o u n t o f l e a r n i n g a p e r s o n h a d ex-

p e r i e n c e d . A l t h o u g h s o m e early findings c l a i m e d such a relationship, later

r e s e a r c h d e t e r m i n e d t h a t this was n o t a valid m e a s u r e of brain d e v e l o p m e n t .

By t h e 1 9 6 0 s , new t e c h n o l o g i e s h a d b e e n d e v e l o p e d t h a t gave scientists

t h e ability to m e a s u r e brain c h a n g e s with precision using high-magnification

t e c h n i q u e s a n d assessment o f levels o f various brain enzymes a n d n e u r o t r a n s -

m i t t e r c h e m i c a l s . M a r k Rosenzweig a n d his c o l l e a g u e s E d w a r d B e n n e t t a n d

M a r i a n D i a m o n d , a t t h e University o f California a t Berkeley, i n c o r p o r a t e d

t h o s e t e c h n o l o g i e s in an ambitious series of 16 e x p e r i m e n t s over a p e r i o d of

1 0 years t o try t o address t h e issue o f t h e effect o f e x p e r i e n c e o n the brain.

T h e i r findings w e r e r e p o r t e d in t h e article discussed in this c h a p t e r . F o r rea-

sons t h a t will b e c o m e obvious, they did n o t use h u m a n s in t h e i r studies, but

r a t h e r , as in m a n y classic psychological e x p e r i m e n t s , t h e i r subjects were rats.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

B e c a u s e psychologists a r e ultimately interested in h u m a n s , n o t rats, t h e valid-

ity of using n o n h u m a n subjects m u s t be d e m o n s t r a t e d . In these studies, t h e

a u t h o r s e x p l a i n e d that, f o r several r e a s o n s , using r o d e n t s r a t h e r t h a n h i g h e r

m a m m a l s such as p r i m a t e s was scientifically s o u n d as well as m o r e convenient.

T h e p a r t o f t h e brain t h a t i s t h e m a i n focus o f this r e s e a r c h i s s m o o t h i n t h e

r a t , n o t folded a n d c o m p l e x as it is in h i g h e r animals. T h e r e f o r e , it c a n be e x -

a m i n e d a n d m e a s u r e d m o r e easily. I n addition, rats a r e small a n d i n e x p e n -

sive, which is an i m p o r t a n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n in t h e world of r e s e a r c h laboratories

(usually u n d e r f u n d e d a n d lacking in s p a c e ) . Rats b e a r l a r g e litters, a n d this al-

lows for m e m b e r s f r o m t h e s a m e litters to be assigned to different e x p e r i m e n -

tal c o n d i t i o n s . T h e a u t h o r s p o i n t o u t t h a t various strains o f i n b r e d rats have

b e e n p r o d u c e d , a n d this allows r e s e a r c h e r s t o i n c l u d e t h e effects o f genetics

in t h e i r studies if desired.

Reading 2 More Experience = Bigger Brain 13

Implicit in Rosenzweig's r e s e a r c h was t h e belief that animals raised in

highly stimulating e n v i r o n m e n t s will d e m o n s t r a t e differences in brain growth

a n d c h e m i s t r y when c o m p a r e d with animals r e a r e d i n plain o r dull c i r c u m -

stances. In e a c h of t h e e x p e r i m e n t s r e p o r t e d in this article, 12 sets of 3 m a l e

rats, e a c h set from t h e s a m e litter, were studied.

M E T H O D

T h r e e m a l e rats were c h o s e n f r o m e a c h litter. T h e y w e r e t h e n r a n d o m l y as-

signed t o o n e o f t h r e e conditions. O n e r a t r e m a i n e d i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y c a g e

with t h e rest of t h e colony; a n o t h e r was assigned to what Rosenzweig t e r m e d

t h e "enriched" e n v i r o n m e n t c a g e ; a n d t h e third was assigned to t h e "impover-

ished" c a g e . R e m e m b e r , 12 rats were p l a c e d in e a c h of these c o n d i t i o n s for

e a c h o f t h e 1 6 e x p e r i m e n t s .

T h e t h r e e different e n v i r o n m e n t s ( F i g u r e 2-1) were described as follows:

1. T h e s t a n d a r d l a b o r a t o r y c o l o n y c a g e c o n t a i n e d several rats in an a d e -

q u a t e space with food a n d w a t e r always available.

2. T h e impoverished environment was a slighdy smaller c a g e isolated in a sep-

arate r o o m in which the rat was placed alone with a d e q u a t e food a n d water.

FIGURE 2-1 Rosenzweig's three cage environments.

14 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

3. T h e e n r i c h e d e n v i r o n m e n t was virtually a rat's Disneyland ( n o offense

i n t e n d e d to Mickey!). Six to eight rats lived in a "large c a g e furnished

with a variety of objects with which they c o u l d play. A new set of play-

things, drawn o u t of a p o o l of 25 objects, was p l a c e d in t h e c a g e every

day" ( p . 2 2 ) .

T h e rats were allowed to live in these different e n v i r o n m e n t s for various

p e r i o d s of time, r a n g i n g f r o m 4 to 10 weeks. Following this differential treat-

m e n t p e r i o d , t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l r o d e n t s w e r e e x a m i n e d t o d e t e r m i n e i f any

differences h a d d e v e l o p e d i n brain d e v e l o p m e n t . T o b e sure that n o e x p e r i -

m e n t e r bias would o c c u r , t h e e x a m i n a t i o n s were d o n e i n r a n d o m o r d e r b y

c o d e n u m b e r so t h a t t h e p e r s o n d o i n g t h e autopsy would n o t know in which

c o n d i t i o n t h e r a t was raised.

T h e r a t s ' b r a i n s w e r e t h e n m e a s u r e d , weighed, a n d analyzed t o d e t e r -

m i n e t h e a m o u n t o f cell g r o w t h a n d levels o f n e u r o t r a n s m i t t e r activity. I n

this latter m e a s u r e m e n t , o n e brain e n z y m e was of p a r t i c u l a r interest: acetylcho-

linesterase. T h i s c h e m i c a l is i m p o r t a n t b e c a u s e it allows for faster a n d m o r e

efficient transmission of impulses a m o n g brain cells.

Did Rosenzweig a n d his associates find differences in t h e brains of rats

raised in e n r i c h e d versus i m p o v e r i s h e d e n v i r o n m e n t s ? T h e following a r e their

results.

R E S U L T S

Results i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e brains o f t h e e n r i c h e d rats w e r e i n d e e d different

f r o m t h o s e of t h e i m p o v e r i s h e d rats in m a n y ways. T h e cerebral cortex ( t h e p a r t

o f t h e brain that r e s p o n d s t o e x p e r i e n c e a n d i s responsible for m o v e m e n t ,

m e m o r y , l e a r n i n g , a n d sensory input: vision, h e a r i n g , t o u c h , taste, smell) o f

t h e e n r i c h e d rats was significantly heavier a n d thicker. Also, g r e a t e r activity of

t h e n e r v o u s system e n z y m e acetylcholinesterase, m e n t i o n e d previously, was

f o u n d in t h e brain tissue of t h e rats with t h e e n r i c h e d e x p e r i e n c e .

A l t h o u g h no significant differences w e r e f o u n d between t h e two g r o u p s

o f rats i n t h e n u m b e r o f b r a i n cells (neurons), t h e e n r i c h e d e n v i r o n m e n t p r o -

d u c e d l a r g e r n e u r o n s . R e l a t e d t o this was t h e f i n d i n g t h a t t h e r a t i o o f RNA t o

DNA, t h e two m o s t i m p o r t a n t brain c h e m i c a l s for cell growth, was g r e a t e r for

t h e e n r i c h e d rats. T h i s implied t h a t a h i g h e r level of c h e m i c a l activity h a d

taken p l a c e i n t h e e n r i c h e d rats' brains.

Rosenzweig a n d his c o l l e a g u e s stated t h a t "although t h e brain differ-

e n c e s i n d u c e d b y e n v i r o n m e n t a r e n o t l a r g e , w e a r e c o n f i d e n t that they a r e

g e n u i n e . W h e n t h e e x p e r i m e n t s a r e r e p l i c a t e d , t h e s a m e p a t t e r n o f differ-

e n c e s i s f o u n d r e p e a t e d l y . . . . T h e m o s t consistent effect o f e x p e r i e n c e o n

t h e brain t h a t w e f o u n d was t h e r a t i o o f t h e weight o f t h e c o r t e x t o the weight

o f t h e rest o f t h e brain: t h e s u b - c o r t e x . I t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e c o r t e x increases i n

weight quite readily in r e s p o n s e to e x p e r i e n c e , w h e r e a s t h e rest of t h e brain

c h a n g e s little" ( p . 2 5 ) . T h i s m e a s u r e m e n t o f t h e r a t i o o f t h e c o r t e x t o t h e rest

o f the brain was the m o s t a c c u r a t e m e a s u r e m e n t o f brain c h a n g e s b e c a u s e t h e

Reading 2 More Experience = Bigger Brain 15

FIGURE 2-2 Ratio of cortex to the rest of the brain: en-

riched compared with impoverished environment. (Results

in experiments 2 through 16 were statistically significant.)

(Adapted from Rosenzweig, Bennett, & Diamond, p. 26.)

overall weight of t h e brain may vary with t h e overall weight of e a c h a n i m a l . By

considering this ratio, such individual differences a r e c a n c e l e d out. F i g u r e 2-2

illustrates this finding for all 16 studies. As you c a n see, in only o n e e x p e r i -

m e n t was t h e difference not statistically significant.

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s r e p o r t e d a finding relating to t h e two r a t g r o u p s ' brain

synapses ( t h e points at which two n e u r o n s m e e t ) . Most brain activity o c c u r s at

t h e synapse, w h e r e a n e r v e impulse is e i t h e r passed f r o m o n e n e u r o n to t h e

n e x t so t h a t it c o n t i n u e s o n , or it is inhibited a n d s t o p p e d . U n d e r g r e a t m a g -

nification using t h e e l e c t r o n m i c r o s c o p e , t h e r e s e a r c h e r s f o u n d that t h e

synapses o f t h e e n r i c h e d rats' brains w e r e 5 0 % l a r g e r t h a n t h o s e o f t h e im-

poverished rats, potentially allowing for i n c r e a s e d brain activity.

D I S C U S S I O N A N D C R I T I C I S M S

After nearly 10 years of research, Rosenzweig, Bennett, a n d D i a m o n d were will-

ing to state with confidence, "There c a n now be no doubt that many aspects of

brain anatomy a n d brain chemistry a r e c h a n g e d by e x p e r i e n c e " (p. 2 7 ) . How-

ever, they were also quick to acknowledge that, when they first r e p o r t e d their

findings, many o t h e r scientists were skeptical because such effects h a d n o t b e e n

so clearly d e m o n s t r a t e d in past r e s e a r c h . S o m e criticism c o n t e n d e d that perhaps

it was n o t the e n r i c h e d environment that p r o d u c e d the brain c h a n g e s but r a t h e r

o t h e r differences in the t r e a t m e n t of the rats, such as m e r e handling or stress.

16 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

T h e criticism of differential handling was a valid o n e in that the en-

riched rats were h a n d l e d twice e a c h day when they were r e m o v e d from t h e

c a g e as t h e toys w e r e being c h a n g e d , but t h e impoverished rats were n o t han-

dled. It was possible, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e h a n d l i n g a l o n e m i g h t have caused t h e

results a n d n o t t h e e n r i c h e d e n v i r o n m e n t . T o r e s p o n d t o this potentially c o n -

f o u n d i n g factor, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s h a n d l e d o n e g r o u p o f rats every day a n d did

n o t h a n d l e a n o t h e r g r o u p of t h e i r litter m a t e s (all were raised in t h e same en-

v i r o n m e n t ) . Rosenzweig a n d his associates found no differences in t h e brains

of these two g r o u p s . In addition, in t h e i r l a t e r studies, b o t h t h e e n r i c h e d a n d

impoverished rats w e r e h a n d l e d equally a n d , still, t h e s a m e p a t t e r n of results

was found.

As for t h e criticisms relating to stress, t h e a r g u m e n t was that the isola-

tion e x p e r i e n c e d by t h e impoverished rats was stressful, a n d this was the rea-

son for t h e i r less-developed brains. Rosenzweig et al. cited o t h e r r e s e a r c h that

h a d e x p o s e d rats to a daily r o u t i n e of stress ( c a g e r o t a t i o n or mild e l e c t r i c

s h o c k ) a n d h a d f o u n d n o e v i d e n c e o f c h a n g e s i n brain d e v e l o p m e n t d u e t o

stress a l o n e .

O n e of t h e p r o b l e m s of any r e s e a r c h c a r r i e d out in a l a b o r a t o r y is that it

is nearly always an artificial e n v i r o n m e n t . Rosenzweig a n d his colleagues were

c u r i o u s a b o u t how various levels of stimulation m i g h t affect t h e brain devel-

o p m e n t of a n i m a l s in t h e i r natural e n v i r o n m e n t s . T h e y p o i n t e d o u t that labo-

r a t o r y rats a n d m i c e often have b e e n raised in artificial e n v i r o n m e n t s for as

m a n y as a h u n d r e d g e n e r a t i o n s a n d b e a r little g e n e t i c r e s e m b l a n c e to rats in

t h e wild. To e x p l o r e this intriguing possibility, they b e g a n studying wild d e e r

m i c e . After t h e m i c e w e r e t r a p p e d , they were r a n d o m l y p l a c e d in e i t h e r nat-

ural o u t d o o r c o n d i t i o n s or t h e e n r i c h e d l a b o r a t o r y cages. After 4 weeks, t h e

o u t d o o r m i c e showed g r e a t e r brain d e v e l o p m e n t t h a n did those in the en-

r i c h e d l a b o r a t o r y e n v i r o n m e n t . ' T h i s indicates t h a t even t h e e n r i c h e d labora-

t o r y e n v i r o n m e n t is i n d e e d impoverished in c o m p a r i s o n with a natural

e n v i r o n m e n t " ( p . 2 7 ) .

T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t criticism of any r e s e a r c h involving animal subjects is

t h e question of its application, if any, to h u m a n s . W i t h o u t a doubt, this line of

r e s e a r c h c o u l d never be p e r f o r m e d on h u m a n s , b u t it is nevertheless the re-

sponsibility of t h e r e s e a r c h e r s to address this issue, a n d these scientists did so.

T h e a u t h o r s e x p l a i n e d t h a t it is difficult to g e n e r a l i z e f r o m t h e findings

of o n e set of rats to a n o t h e r set of rats, a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y it is m u c h m o r e dif-

ficult to try to apply r a t findings to m o n k e y s or h u m a n s . A n d , a l t h o u g h they

r e p o r t similar findings with several species of r o d e n t s , they a d m i t that m o r e

r e s e a r c h would b e n e c e s s a r y b e f o r e any assumptions c o u l d b e m a d e responsi-

bly a b o u t t h e effects o f e x p e r i e n c e o n t h e h u m a n brain. T h e y p r o p o s e d , how-

ever, t h a t t h e value of this kind of r e s e a r c h on animals is that "it allows us to

test c o n c e p t s a n d t e c h n i q u e s , s o m e of which may l a t e r prove useful in r e -

s e a r c h with h u m a n subjects" ( p . 2 7 ) .

Several potential benefits of this r e s e a r c h were suggested by t h e a u t h o r s .

O n e possible application p e r t a i n e d t o t h e study o f m e m o r y . C h a n g e s i n the

Reading 2 More Experience = Bigger Brain 17

brain d u e t o e x p e r i e n c e m i g h t lead t o a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f how m e m o -

ries a r e s t o r e d in t h e brain. This c o u l d , in t u r n , lead to new t e c h n i q u e s for im-

proving m e m o r y a n d preventing m e m o r y loss d u e t o aging. A n o t h e r a r e a i n

which this r e s e a r c h m i g h t prove helpful was in e x p l a i n i n g t h e relationship be-

tween malnutrition a n d intelligence. T h e c o n c e p t p r o p o s e d b y t h e a u t h o r s i n

this r e g a r d was that m a l n u t r i t i o n may be a p e r s o n ' s responsiveness to t h e stim-

ulation available in t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a n d c o n s e q u e n t l y may limit brain devel-

o p m e n t . T h e a u t h o r s also n o t e d that o t h e r studies suggested t h a t t h e effects

o f malnutrition o n brain growth may b e e i t h e r r e d u c e d b y e n v i r o n m e n t a l e n -

richment or i n c r e a s e d by deprivation.

R E L A T E D R E S E A R C H A N D R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

This work by Rosenzweig, B e n n e t t , a n d D i a m o n d has served as a catalyst for

c o n t i n u e d r e s e a r c h in this d e v e l o p m e n t a l a r e a t h a t c o n t i n u e s today. O v e r t h e

d e c a d e s since t h e publication o f t h e i r article, these scientists a n d m a n y o t h e r s

have c o n t i n u e d t o c o n f i r m , refine, a n d e x p a n d their findings. F o r e x a m p l e ,

r e s e a r c h has d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t l e a r n i n g itself is e n h a n c e d by e n r i c h e d envi-

r o n m e n t a l e x p e r i e n c e s a n d that even t h e brains of adult animals raised in im-

poverished c o n d i t i o n s c a n be i m p r o v e d when p l a c e d in an e n r i c h e d

e n v i r o n m e n t (see B e n n e t t , 1 9 7 6 , for a c o m p l e t e review).

S o m e evidence exists to indicate t h a t e x p e r i e n c e d o e s i n d e e d alter brain

d e v e l o p m e n t in h u m a n s . T h r o u g h careful autopsies of h u m a n s who have died

naturally, it a p p e a r s that as a p e r s o n develops a g r e a t e r n u m b e r of skills a n d

abilities, t h e brain actually b e c o m e s m o r e c o m p l e x a n d heavier. O t h e r findings

have c o m e from e x a m i n a t i o n s during autopsies o f the brains o f p e o p l e who

were unable to have certain e x p e r i e n c e s . F o r e x a m p l e , in a blind person's

brain, the p o r t i o n of the c o r t e x used for vision is significantly less developed,

less convoluted, a n d t h i n n e r than in t h e brain of a p e r s o n with n o r m a l sight.

Marian D i a m o n d , o n e o f t h e a u t h o r s o f this original article, has applied

t h e results of work in this a r e a to the p r o c e s s of h u m a n intellectual develop-

m e n t t h r o u g h o u t life. She says, "For people's lives, I think we c a n take a m o r e

optimistic view o f t h e aging brain . . . . T h e m a i n f a c t o r i s stimulation. T h e

n e r v e cells a r e designed for stimulation. A n d I think curiosity is a key factor. If

o n e maintains curiosity for a lifetime, t h a t will surely stimulate n e u r a l tissue

a n d t h e c o r t e x may i n t u r n r e s p o n d . . . . I l o o k e d for p e o p l e w h o w e r e ex-

tremely active after 88 years of a g e . I f o u n d t h a t t h e p e o p l e w h o use t h e i r

brains d o n ' t lose t h e m . It was that simple" (in H o p s o n , 1 9 8 4 , p. 7 0 ) .

Two r e c e n t studies have e l a b o r a t e d o n Rosenzweig, D i a m o n d , a n d

B e n n e t t ' s n o t i o n s o f e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences o n brain d e v e l o p m e n t i n very

diverse applications. Weiss a n d Bellinger ( 2 0 0 6 ) e x p a n d e d on t h e r e s e a r c h by

suggesting that studies of t h e effects of e n v i r o n m e n t a l toxins on early brain

d e v e l o p m e n t i n h u m a n s must e n c o m p a s s n o t only t h e toxicity o f t h e c h e m i c a l

but also should c o n s i d e r all t h e factors p r e s e n t within t h e individual's overall

life c o n t e x t , i n c l u d i n g g e n e t i c t e n d e n c i e s a n d e n r i c h e d o r i m p o v e r i s h e d

18 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

e n v i r o n m e n t s . T h e a u t h o r s p r o p o s e d that, i n h u m a n s , t h e effects o f e x p o s u r e

to t o x i c substances tends to be d i r e c d y r e l a t e d to growing up in an e n r i c h e d

versus a n impoverished e n v i r o n m e n t . I n o t h e r words, w h e n c h i l d r e n a r e

raised in poverty, n o t only is t h e i r d e v e l o p m e n t a l e n v i r o n m e n t likely to be im-

poverished, b u t they may also be at a g r e a t e r risk of e x p o s u r e to n e u r o t o x i c

c h e m i c a l s . M o r e o v e r , t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l f a c t o r s t h a t a r e p r e s e n t c a n affect t h e

o u t c o m e o f t h e t o x i c e x p o s u r e o n brain d e v e l o p m e n t . Weiss a n d Bellinger as-

s e r t e d t h a t w h e n r e s e a r c h e r s have studied e n v i r o n m e n t a l toxins, t h e t e n d e n c y

h a s b e e n t o focus o n t h e t o x i c s u b s t a n c e itself a n d t o minimize t h e a c c o m p a -

nying situational variables. As t h e a u t h o r s stated:

We argue that the outcomes of exposure to neurotoxic chemicals early in life are shaped by the nature of a child's social environment, including that prevailing before birth . . . . We contend that a true evaluation of toxic potential and its neurobehavioral consequences is inseparable from the ecologic setting [such as environmental richness] in which they act and which creates unique, enduring individual vulnerabilities." (p. 1497)

A n o t h e r article cites Rosenzweig's 1 9 7 2 study in critiquing some r e c e n t at-

tempts to oversimplify e n r i c h m e n t strategies in attempts to e n h a n c e children's

brain development (Jones & Zigler, 2 0 0 2 ) . As you can imagine, when the public

learns about r e s e a r c h such as Rosenzweig's, a p o p u l a r m o v e m e n t may be b o r n

that sounds attractive but has little basis in scientific fact. O n e of these from t h e

1 9 9 0 s , which you may have h e a r d about, has b e c o m e known as the "Mozart

E f f e c t " This fad began with s o m e preliminary r e s e a r c h showing that when chil-

d r e n listen to Mozart (but n o t o t h e r classical c o m p o s e r s ) they b e c o m e better

learners. This idea has grown to the point that entire W e b sites a r e devoted to the

benefits of the "Mozart Effect" for children a n d adults alike, involving claims that

certain music c a n e n h a n c e overall health, improve m e m o r y , treat attention

deficit disorder, r e d u c e depression, a n d speed healing f r o m physical injuries.

C O N C L U S I O N

J o n e s a n d Zigler ( 2 0 0 2 ) m a i n t a i n t h a t such p o p u l a r applications o f the r e -

s e a r c h a r e ineffective a n d even d a n g e r o u s . T h e y c o n t e n d , "Brain r e s e a r c h is

being m i s a p p r o p r i a t e d t o t h e service o f misguided 'quick f i x ' solutions t o

m o r e c o m p l i c a t e d , systemic issues" ( p . 3 5 5 ) . T h e y f u r t h e r suggest that when

scientific b r a i n a n d l e a r n i n g r e s e a r c h is applied carefully a n d correctly, it c a n

m a k e a "substantive c o n t r i b u t i o n of high quality, intensive, m u l t i d o m a i n in-

t e r v e n t i o n s t o early cognitive a n d social d e v e l o p m e n t " ( p . 3 5 5 ) .

Bennett, E. L. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . Cerebral effects of differential experience and training. In M. R. Rosen- zweig & E. L. Bennett (Eds.), Neural mechanisms of learning and memory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hopson, J. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . A love affair with the brain: A PT conversation with Marian Diamond. Psychology Today, 11, 6 2 - 7 5 .

Jones, S., & Zigler, E. ( 2 0 0 2 ) . The Mozart Effect: Not learning from history. Journal of Applied De- velopmental Psychology, 23, 3 5 5 - 3 7 2 .

Weiss, B., & Bellinger, D. C. ( 2 0 0 6 ) . Social ecology of children's vulnerability to environmental pollutants. (Commentary). Environmental Health Perspectives, 114, 1 4 7 9 - 1 4 8 5 .

Reading3 Are You a "Natural?" 19

Reading 3: ARE YOU A "NATURAL?" Bouchard, T., Lykken, D., McGue, M., Segal, N., &Tellegen, A. (1990). Sources of

human psychological differences: The Minnesota study of twins reared apart. Scie-

nce, 250, 2 2 3 - 2 2 9 .

This study r e p r e s e n t s a relatively r e c e n t a n d o n g o i n g f u n d a m e n t a l c h a n g e in

t h e way m a n y psychologists view h u m a n n a t u r e in its b r o a d e s t sense. You c a n

relate to this c h a n g e in a p e r s o n a l way by first taking a m o m e n t to answer in

y o u r m i n d t h e following question: "Who a r e you?" T h i n k for a m o m e n t a b o u t

s o m e of y o u r individual characteristics: y o u r "personality traits." A r e you high

strung o r laid-back? A r e you shy o r o u t g o i n g ? A r e you a d v e n t u r o u s , o r d o you

seek out c o m f o r t a n d safety? A r e you easy to g e t a l o n g with, or do you t e n d to-

ward t h e disagreeable? A r e you usually optimistic o r m o r e pessimistic a b o u t

t h e o u t c o m e o f future events? T h i n k a b o u t yourself i n t e r m s o f these o r any

o t h e r questions you feel a r e relevant. Take y o u r t i m e . . . . Finished? Now, an-

swer this n e x t , a n d , fór this r e a d i n g , m o r e i m p o r t a n t question: "Why a r e you

who you a r e ? " In o t h e r words, what factors c o n t r i b u t e d to "creating" this p e r -

son you a r e today?

If you a r e like m o s t p e o p l e , you will p o i n t to t h e child-rearing p r a c t i c e s

of y o u r p a r e n t s a n d t h e values, goals, a n d priorities they instilled in you. You

m i g h t also c r e d i t t h e influences o f b r o t h e r s , sisters, g r a n d p a r e n t s , a u n t s , un-

cles, peers, t e a c h e r s , a n d o t h e r m e n t o r s w h o played key roles in m o l d i n g you.

Still o t h e r s of you will focus on key life-changing events, such as an illness, t h e

loss of a loved o n e , or t h e decision to a t t e n d a specific c o l l e g e , c h o o s e a major,

or take a p a r t i c u l a r life c o u r s e that s e e m e d to lead you toward b e c o m i n g y o u r

c u r r e n t self. All these influences s h a r e o n e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c : they a r e all

environmental p h e n o m e n a . Hardly a n y o n e ever replies to t h e question "Why

a r e you who you a r e ? " with "I was b o r n to be w h o I a m ; it's all in my genes."

E v e r y o n e acknowledges t h a t physical attributes, such as height, h a i r

color, eye color, a n d body type, a r e g e n e t i c . M o r e a n d m o r e p e o p l e a r e realiz-

ing that t e n d e n c i e s toward m a n y illnesses, such as c a n c e r , h e a r t disease, a n d

high blood pressure, have significant g e n e t i c c o m p o n e n t s . However, almost

no o n e thinks of g e n e s as t h e main f o r c e b e h i n d w h o they a r e psychologically.

This may strike you as o d d when you stop to think a b o u t it, b u t in reality very

u n d e r s t a n d a b l e r e a s o n s explain o u r "environmental bias."

First o f all, psychology d u r i n g t h e s e c o n d h a l f o f t h e 2 0 t h c e n t u r y was

d o m i n a t e d by t h e behaviorism t h e o r y of h u m a n n a t u r e . Basically, that t h e o r y

states that all h u m a n behavior is c o n t r o l l e d by e n v i r o n m e n t a l factors, includ-

ing t h e stimuli that p r o v o k e behaviors a n d t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s t h a t follow r e -

sponse c h o i c e s . Strict behaviorists believed t h a t t h e i n t e r n a l psychological

workings of t h e h u m a n m i n d w e r e n o t only impossible to study scientifically

but, also, that such study was u n n e c e s s a r y a n d irrelevant to a c o m p l e t e expla-

nation for h u m a n behavior. W h e t h e r t h e wider c u l t u r e a c c e p t e d o r even un-

d e r s t o o d formal t h e o r i e s of behaviorism is n o t as i m p o r t a n t as t h e reality of

20 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

t h e i r influence on today's firmly e n t r e n c h e d p o p u l a r belief that experience is

t h e p r i m a r y o r exclusive a r c h i t e c t o f h u m a n n a t u r e .

A n o t h e r u n d e r s t a n d a b l e r e a s o n for t h e pervasive a c c e p t a n c e o f envi-

r o n m e n t a l e x p l a n a t i o n s o f b e h a v i o r i s that g e n e t i c a n d biological factors d o

n o t provide visible e v i d e n c e of t h e i r influence. It's easy for s o m e o n e to say "I

b e c a m e a writer b e c a u s e I was deeply inspired a n d e n c o u r a g e d by my seventh-

g r a d e c o m p o s i t i o n t e a c h e r . " You r e m e m b e r those sorts o f influences; you see

t h e m ; they a r e p a r t o f y o u r past a n d p r e s e n t c o n s c i o u s e x p e r i e n c e s . You

would find it m u c h m o r e difficult to r e c o g n i z e biological influences a n d say "I

b e c a m e a writer b e c a u s e my DNA c o n t a i n s a g e n e that has been e x p r e s s e d in

m e t h a t predisposes m e t o write well." You c a n ' t see, t o u c h , o r r e m e m b e r t h e

influence of y o u r g e n e s , a n d you d o n ' t even know w h e r e in y o u r body they

m i g h t b e l o c a t e d !

In addition, m a n y p e o p l e a r e u n c o m f o r t a b l e with t h e idea that they

m i g h t b e t h e p r o d u c t o f t h e i r g e n e s r a t h e r t h a n t h e c h o i c e s they have m a d e i n

t h e i r lives. S u c h ideas s m a c k of d e t e r m i n i s m a n d a lack of free will. Most p e o -

ple have a s t r o n g dislike for any t h e o r y t h a t m i g h t in s o m e way limit t h e i r c o n -

scious ability to d e t e r m i n e t h e o u t c o m e s in t h e i r lives. Consequently, g e n e t i c

causes o f behavior a n d personality t e n d t o b e avoided o r r e j e c t e d . I n reality,

g e n e t i c influences i n t e r a c t with e x p e r i e n c e to m o l d a c o m p l e t e h u m a n , a n d

t h e only question is this: W h i c h is m o r e d o m i n a n t ? Or, to p h r a s e t h e question

as it f r e q u e n ü y a p p e a r s in t h e m e d i a , "Is it nature or nurture?"

T h e article b y T h o m a s B o u c h a r d , David Lykken, a n d their associates a t

t h e University of M i n n e s o t a in Minneapolis t h a t is r e f e r e n c e d in this c h a p t e r

is a review of r e s e a r c h that b e g a n in 1 9 7 9 to e x a m i n e t h e question of how

m u c h influence y o u r g e n e s have i n d e t e r m i n i n g y o u r p e r s o n a l psychological

qualities. T h i s r e s e a r c h grew o u t of a n e e d for a scientific m e t h o d to s e p a r a t e

g e n e t i c influences ( n a t u r e ) f r o m e n v i r o n m e n t a l forces ( n u r t u r e ) o n people's

behavior a n d personality. T h i s is no simple task w h e n you c o n s i d e r that nearly

every o n e o f you, assuming you w e r e n o t a d o p t e d , grew a n d developed u n d e r

t h e d i r e c t e n v i r o n m e n t a l influence o f y o u r g e n e t i c d o n o r s (your p a r e n t s ) .

You m i g h t , for e x a m p l e , have t h e s a m e sense o f h u m o r a s y o u r father ( n o of-

fense!) b e c a u s e y o u l e a r n e d i t f r o m h i m ( n u r t u r e ) o r b e c a u s e you i n h e r i t e d

his "sense-of-humor" g e n e ( n a t u r e ) . N o systematic a p p r o a c h c a n tease those

two influences a p a r t , right?

Well, B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken would say "wrong." T h e y have found a way

to d e t e r m i n e with a r e a s o n a b l e d e g r e e of c o n f i d e n c e which psychological

c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a p p e a r t o b e d e t e r m i n e d primarily b y g e n e t i c factors a n d

which a r e m o l d e d m o r e b y y o u r e n v i r o n m e n t .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

It's simple, really. All you have to do is take two h u m a n s who have e x a c d y t h e

s a m e g e n e s , s e p a r a t e t h e m at b i r t h , a n d raise t h e m in significandy different

e n v i r o n m e n t s . T h e n y o u c a n a s s u m e t h a t t h o s e behavioral a n d personality

characteristics they have in c o m m o n as adults must be g e n e t i c . B u t how on

Reading3 Are You a "Natural?" 21

e a r t h c a n r e s e a r c h e r s possibly find pairs of identical people ( d o n ' t say

"cloning"; we're n o t t h e r e yet!)? A n d even if they c o u l d , it would be u n e t h i c a l

to f o r c e t h e m i n t o diverse e n v i r o n m e n t s , wouldn't it? As you've a l r e a d y

guessed, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s didn't have t o d o that. Society h a d a l r e a d y d o n e i t

for t h e m . Identical twins have virtually t h e s a m e g e n e t i c s t r u c t u r e . T h e y a r e

called monozygotic twins b e c a u s e they start as o n e fertilized egg, called a zygote,

a n d t h e n split into two identical e m b r y o s . F r a t e r n a l twins a r e t h e result of two

s e p a r a t e eggs fertilized by two s e p a r a t e s p e r m cells a n d a r e r e f e r r e d to as

dizygotic twins. F r a t e r n a l twins a r e only as genetically similar as any two n o n -

twin siblings. As u n f o r t u n a t e as it sounds, twin infants a r e s o m e t i m e s given up

for a d o p t i o n a n d p l a c e d in s e p a r a t e h o m e s . A d o p t i o n a g e n c i e s will try to k e e p

siblings, especially twins, t o g e t h e r , but t h e m o r e i m p o r t a n t goal is to find

g o o d h o m e s for t h e m even if it m e a n s separation. O v e r time, t h o u s a n d s of

identical a n d f r a t e r n a l twins have b e e n a d o p t e d into s e p a r a t e h o m e s a n d

raised, frequently without t h e knowledge that they w e r e a twin, in different

a n d often c o n t r a s t i n g e n v i r o n m e n t a l settings.

I n 1 9 8 3 B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken b e g a n t o identify, l o c a t e , a n d bring to-

g e t h e r pairs o f these twins. This 1 9 9 0 article r e p o r t s o n results f r o m 5 6 pairs o f

monozygotic r e a r e d - a p a r t (MZA) twins from t h e U n i t e d States a n d seven

o t h e r c o u n t r i e s w h o a g r e e d to p a r t i c i p a t e in weeklong sessions of intensive

psychological a n d physiological tests a n d m e a s u r e m e n t s ( t h a t this r e s e a r c h is

l o c a t e d in Minneapolis, o n e h a l f of "the Twin Cities" is an irony t h a t has not,

by any m e a n s , g o n e u n n o t i c e d ) . T h e s e twins were c o m p a r e d with monozy-

gotic twins r e a r e d t o g e t h e r ( M Z T ) . T h e surprising f i n d i n g s c o n t i n u e t o rever-

b e r a t e t h r o u g h o u t t h e biological a n d behavioral sciences.

M E T H O D

Participants

T h e first c h a l l e n g e for this p r o j e c t was to find sets of m o n o z y g o t i c twins w h o

were s e p a r a t e d early in life, r e a r e d a p a r t for all of m o s t of t h e i r lives, a n d r e -

united a s adults. Most o f t h e participants were f o u n d t h r o u g h word o f m o u t h

as news of t h e study b e g a n to spread. T h e twins themselves or their friends or

family m e m b e r s would c o n t a c t t h e r e s e a r c h institute, t h e M i n n e s o t a C e n t e r

for Twin a n d A d o p t i o n R e s e a r c h ( M I C T A R ) , various social-services profes-

sionals in t h e a d o p t i o n a r e n a would serve as c o n t a c t s , or, in s o m e cases o n e

m e m b e r of a twin-pair would c o n t a c t the c e n t e r for assistance in locating a n d

reuniting with his or h e r sibling. All twins were tested to e n s u r e t h a t they were

i n d e e d monozygotic before beginning t h e i r participation in t h e study.

Procedure

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s wanted to be sure they o b t a i n e d as m u c h d a t a as possible dur-

ing t h e twins' one-week visit. E a c h twin c o m p l e t e d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 50 h o u r s of

testing o n nearly every h u m a n d i m e n s i o n y o u m i g h t i m a g i n e . T h e y c o m -

pleted four personality trait scales, t h r e e a p t i t u d e a n d o c c u p a t i o n a l interest

22 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

'Adapted from Table 4, p. 226. **1.00 would imply that MZA twin pairs were found to be exactly as similar as MZT twin pairs.

inventories, a n d two intelligence tests. In addition, t h e participants filled in

checklists of h o u s e h o l d belongings ( s u c h as p o w e r tools, telescope, original

artwork, u n a b r i d g e d d i c t i o n a r y ) , to assess t h e similarity of their family r e -

s o u r c e s , a n d a family e n v i r o n m e n t scale t h a t m e a s u r e d how they felt a b o u t t h e

p a r e n t i n g they received f r o m t h e i r adoptive p a r e n t s . T h e y were also adminis-

t e r e d a life history interview, a psychiatric interview, a n d a sexual history in-

terview. All these assessments w e r e c a r r i e d o u t individually so that it was n o t

possible for o n e twin to inadvertently influence t h e answers a n d responses of

t h e other.

As you m i g h t i m a g i n e , t h e h o u r s of testing c r e a t e d a h u g e database of in-

f o r m a t i o n . T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t a n d surprising results a r e discussed h e r e .

R E S U L T S

Table 3-1 s u m m a r i z e s t h e similarities for s o m e o f t h e characteristics m e a s u r e d

in t h e m o n o z y g o t i c twins r e a r e d a p a r t (MZA) a n d includes t h e same d a t a for

m o n o z y g o t i c twins r e a r e d t o g e t h e r ( M Z T ) . T h e d e g r e e o f similarity i s ex-

pressed i n t h e table a s c o r r e l a t i o n s o r rvalues. T h e l a r g e r t h e c o r r e l a t i o n , t h e

g r e a t e r t h e similarity. T h e logic h e r e is t h a t if e n v i r o n m e n t is responsible for

individual differences, t h e M Z T twins w h o s h a r e d t h e s a m e e n v i r o n m e n t as

they grew up should be significantly m o r e similar than t h e MZA twins. As you

c a n see, this is n o t what t h e r e s e a r c h e r s found.

Reading3 Are You a "Natural?" 23

T h e last c o l u m n in T a b l e 3-1 e x p r e s s e s t h e d i f f e r e n c e in similarity by di-

viding t h e MZA c o r r e l a t i o n o n e a c h c h a r a c t e r i s t i c b y t h e M Z T c o r r e l a t i o n . I f

b o t h c o r r e l a t i o n s w e r e t h e s a m e , t h e result would b e 1 . 0 0 ; i f they w e r e en-

tirely dissimilar, t h e result c o u l d be as low as 0 . 0 0 . E x a m i n i n g c o l u m n 4 in t h e

table carefully, you'll find t h a t t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s for c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s w e r e r e -

markably s i m i l a r — t h a t is, close t o 1 . 0 0 a n d n o lower t h a n . 7 0 0 for MZA a n d

M Z T twin pairs.

D I S C U S S I O N A N D I M P L I C A T I O N S O F F I N D I N G S

T h e s e findings indicate that g e n e t i c factors ( o r t h e genome) a p p e a r to a c c o u n t

for m o s t of t h e variations in a r e m a r k a b l e variety of h u m a n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s .

This finding was d e m o n s t r a t e d by t h e d a t a in two i m p o r t a n t ways. O n e is t h a t

genetically identical h u m a n s ( m o n o z y g o t i c twins), w h o were raised in sepa-

rate a n d often very different settings, grew i n t o adults w h o w e r e e x t r a o r d i n a r -

ily similar, n o t only in a p p e a r a n c e but also in basic psychology a n d personality.

T h e s e c o n d d e m o n s t r a t i o n in this study of t h e d o m i n a n c e of g e n e s is t h e fact

that t h e r e a p p e a r e d to be little effect of t h e e n v i r o n m e n t on identical twins

who were raised in t h e s a m e setting. H e r e ' s B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken's take on

these discoveries:

For almost every behavioral trait so far investigated, from reaction time to reli- giosity, an important fraction of the variation among people turns out to be as- sociated with genetic variation. This fact need no longer be subject to debate; rather, it is time to consider its implications.

O f c o u r s e , s o m e will a r g u e with B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken's n o t i o n that t h e t i m e

to d e b a t e these issues is over. S o m e varying views a r e discussed in t h e n e x t sec-

tion. However, a discussion of t h e implications of this a n d o t h e r similar stud-

ies by these s a m e r e s e a r c h e r s is clearly w a r r a n t e d . In what ways do t h e g e n e t i c

findings r e p o r t e d in this study c h a n g e psychologists' a n d , for t h a t m a t t e r , all

o f o u r views o f h u m a n n a t u r e ? A s m e n t i o n e d previously, psychology a n d West-

e r n c u l t u r e have b e e n d o m i n a t e d for o v e r 5 0 years b y e n v i r o n m e n t a l think-

ing. Many o f o u r basic beliefs a b o u t p a r e n t i n g , e d u c a t i o n , c r i m e a n d

p u n i s h m e n t , psychotherapy, skills a n d abilities, interests, o c c u p a t i o n a l goals,

a n d social behavior, j u s t to n a m e a few, have b e e n i n t e r p r e t e d f r o m t h e p e r -

spective that people's e x p e r i e n c e m o l d s t h e i r personalities, n o t t h e i r g e n e s .

Very few of us look at s o m e o n e ' s behavior a n d think, T h a t p e r s o n was born to

behave like that!" We want to believe t h a t p e o p l e learned t h e i r behavior pat-

t e r n s b e c a u s e that allows us to feel s o m e m e a s u r e of c o n f i d e n c e t h a t p a r e n t -

ing makes a difference, that positive life e x p e r i e n c e s c a n win o u t o v e r

negative ones, a n d that unhealthy, ineffective behaviors c a n be unlearned. T h e

notion that personality is a d o n e deal t h e m o m e n t we a r e b o r n leaves us with

the t e m p t a t i o n to say "Why b o t h e r ? " W h y b o t h e r working h a r d to be g o o d

parents? W h y b o t h e r trying t o h e l p those w h o a r e down a n d o u t ? W h y b o t h e r

trying to offer quality e d u c a t i o n ? A n d so o n . B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken would

want to be t h e first to disagree with such an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h e i r findings. In

24 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

this a r t i c l e , they offer t h r e e of t h e i r own implications of their provocative c o n -

clusions:

1. Clearly, intelligence is primarily d e t e r m i n e d by g e n e t i c factors ( 7 0 % of

t h e variation in intelligence a p p e a r s to be d u e to g e n e t i c i n f l u e n c e ) .

However, as t h e a u t h o r s state very clearly,

[T]hese findings do not imply that traits like IQ cannot be enhanced . . . . A survey covering 14 countries has shown that the average IQ test score has increased in recent years. The present findings, therefore, do not de- fine or limit what might be conceivably achieved in an optimal environ- ment, (p. 227)

Basically, w h a t t h e a u t h o r s a r e saying i s t h a t a l t h o u g h 7 0 % o f t h e varia-

tion i n I Q i s d u e t o naturally o c c u r r i n g g e n e t i c variation, 3 0 % o f t h e

v a r i a t i o n r e m a i n s subject t o i n c r e a s e s o r d e c r e a s e s d u e t o e n v i r o n m e n -

tal influences. T h e s e i n f l u e n c e s i n c l u d e m a n y that a r e well known,

s u c h a s e d u c a t i o n , family setting, t o x i c s u b s t a n c e s , a n d s o c i o e c o n o m i c

status.

2. T h e basic underlying assumption in B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken's r e s e a r c h is

t h a t h u m a n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e d e t e r m i n e d b y s o m e c o m b i n a t i o n o f ge-

n e t i c a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences. W h e n t h e e n v i r o n m e n t e x e r t s less

influence, differences m u s t be a t t r i b u t e d m o r e to genes. T h e c o n v e r s e is

also t r u e : as e n v i r o n m e n t a l f o r c e s c r e a t e a s t r o n g e r influence on differ-

e n c e s in a p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , g e n e t i c influences will be weaker.

F o r e x a m p l e , m o s t c h i l d r e n in t h e U n i t e d States have t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to

l e a r n to ride a bicycle. This implies t h a t t h e e n v i r o n m e n t ' s effect on

bicycle riding is s o m e w h a t similar for all c h i l d r e n , so differences in rid-

ing ability will be m o r e affected by g e n e t i c forces. On t h e o t h e r h a n d ,

variation in, say, food p r e f e r e n c e s in t h e U n i t e d States a r e m o r e likely to

be e x p l a i n e d by e n v i r o n m e n t a l factors b e c a u s e food a n d taste experi-

e n c e s in c h i l d h o o d a n d t h r o u g h o u t life a r e very diverse a n d will, t h e r e -

f o r e , leave less r o o m for g e n e t i c forces to function. H e r e ' s the interesting

p a r t of t h e r e s e a r c h e r s ' point: they maintain that personality is m o r e like

bicycle riding t h a n food p r e f e r e n c e s .

T h e a u t h o r s a r e saying, i n e s s e n c e , that family e n v i r o n m e n t s e x e r t

less influence o v e r w h o t h e kids g r o w up to be t h a n do t h e g e n e s they in-

h e r i t f r o m birth. Understandably, m o s t p a r e n t s d o n o t want t o h e a r o r

believe this. T h e y a r e working h a r d t o b e g o o d p a r e n t s a n d t o raise t h e i r

c h i l d r e n t o b e h a p p y individuals a n d g o o d citizens. T h e only p a r e n t s

w h o m i g h t take s o m e c o m f o r t f r o m these f i n d i n g s a r e those w h o a r e

n e a r i n g t h e i r wits' e n d with out-of-control o r incorrigible sons o r d a u g h -

ters a n d would a p p r e c i a t e being able to take less of t h e blame! However,

B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken a r e quick t o point o u t that g e n e s a r e n o t n e c e s -

sarily destiny a n d t h a t d e v o t e d p a r e n t s c a n still influence their c h i l d r e n

in positive ways, even if they a r e only working on a small p e r c e n t a g e of

t h e total variation.

Reading3 Are You a "Natural?" 25

3. T h e m o s t intriguing implication that B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken suggest is

t h a t it's n o t t h e e n v i r o n m e n t influencing people's c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , but

vice versa. T h a t is, people's g e n e t i c t e n d e n c i e s actually m o l d t h e i r envi-

r o n m e n t s ! T h e following i s a n e x a m p l e o f t h e i d e a b e h i n d this theory.

T h e fact t h a t s o m e p e o p l e a r e m o r e affectionate t h a n o t h e r s i s usu-

ally seen as e v i d e n c e that s o m e p a r e n t s were m o r e affectionate with

their c h i l d r e n than were o t h e r p a r e n t s . In o t h e r words, affectionate kids

c o m e f r o m affectionate e n v i r o n m e n t s . W h e n this kind o f assumption

has b e e n studied, it is usually f o u n d to be t r u e . Affectionate p e o p l e have,

i n d e e d , received m o r e affection f r o m t h e i r p a r e n t s . B o u c h a r d a n d

Lykken a r e proposing, however, t h a t variation in "affectionateness" may

be, in reality, genetically d e t e r m i n e d so that s o m e c h i l d r e n a r e j u s t b o r n

m o r e affectionate than o t h e r s . T h e i r i n b o r n t e n d e n c y toward affection-

a t e behavior causes t h e m to respond to affection f r o m t h e i r p a r e n t s in

ways that r e i n f o r c e t h e p a r e n t s ' behavior m u c h m o r e t h a n genetically

n o n a f f e c t i o n a t e c h i l d r e n . This, in t u r n produces t h e affectionate behav-

ior i n t h e p a r e n t s , n o t t h e o t h e r way a r o u n d . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s c o n t e n d

that g e n e s function in this way for many, if n o t most, h u m a n c h a r a c t e r i s -

tics. T h e y state it this way:

The proximal [most immediate] cause of most psychological variance probably involves learning through experience, just as radical environ- mentalists have always believed. The effective experiences, however, to an important extent are self-selected, and that selection is guided by the steady pressure of the genome, (p. 228)

C R I T I C I S M S A N D R E L A T E D R E S E A R C H

As you m i g h t i m a g i n e , a g r e a t m a n y r e l a t e d studies have b e e n c a r r i e d o u t

using t h e database of twins developed by B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken. In g e n e r a l ,

t h e findings c o n t i n u e t o indicate that m a n y h u m a n personality c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

a n d behaviors a r e strongly influenced by g e n e s . Many attributes t h a t have

b e e n seen a s s t e m m i n g largely o r c o m p l e t e l y f r o m e n v i r o n m e n t a l s o u r c e s a r e

being reevaluated as twin studies reveal that heredity c o n t r i b u t e s e i t h e r t h e

majority of t h e variation or a significantly l a r g e r p r o p o r t i o n t h a n was previ-

ously c o n t e m p l a t e d .

F o r e x a m p l e , studies f r o m t h e University o f M i n n e s o t a t e a m f o u n d n o t

only t h a t t h e v o c a t i o n you c h o o s e is largely d e t e r m i n e d by y o u r g e n e s b u t

also that a b o u t 3 0 % o f t h e variation i n y o u r overall j o b satisfaction a n d work

e t h i c a p p e a r s d u e t o g e n e t i c f a c t o r s (Arvey e t al., 1 9 8 9 ; Arvey e t al., 1 9 9 4 )

even when t h e physical r e q u i r e m e n t s o f various professions w e r e h e l d c o n -

stant. O t h e r studies c o m p a r i n g identical ( m o n o z y g o t i c ) twins with f r a t e r n a l

(dizygotic) twins, b o t h r e a r e d t o g e t h e r a n d r e a r e d a p a r t , have f o c u s e d m o r e

directly o n specific personality traits t h a t a r e t h o u g h t t o b e influential a n d

stable i n h u m a n s ( B o u c h a r d , 1 9 9 4 ; L o e h l i n , 1 9 9 2 ) . T h e s e a n d o t h e r studies'

findings d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e p e o p l e ' s variation o n t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f

extraversion-introversion ( o u t g o i n g versus shy), neuroticism ( t e n d e n c y to

26 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

suffer f r o m high anxiety a n d e x t r e m e e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s ) , a n d conscien-

tiousness ( d e g r e e to which a p e r s o n is c o m p e t e n t , responsible, a n d t h o r o u g h )

is e x p l a i n e d m o r e ( 6 5 % ) by g e n e t i c differences t h a n by environmental factors.

Of c o u r s e , n o t e v e r y o n e in t h e scientific c o m m u n i t y is willing to a c c e p t

these findings a t face value. T h e criticisms o f B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken's work

take several d i r e c t i o n s ( s e e Billings et al., 1 9 9 2 ) . S o m e studies claim that t h e

r e s e a r c h e r s a r e n o t publishing t h e i r d a t a as fully a n d completely as they

should, a n d , t h e r e f o r e , t h e i r f i n d i n g s c a n n o t b e i n d e p e n d e n d y evaluated.

T h e s e s a m e critics also claim t h a t m a n y articles a r e r e p o r t i n g o n case studies

d e m o n s t r a t i n g s t r o n g e n v i r o n m e n t a l influences o n twins t h a t B o u c h a r d a n d

Lykken fail to consider.

In addition, s o m e r e s e a r c h e r s have voiced a m a j o r criticism of o n e as-

p e c t of twin r e s e a r c h in g e n e r a l , r e f e r r e d to as t h e "equal e n v i r o n m e n t as-

sumption" (e.g., J o s e p h , 2 0 0 2 ) . T h i s a r g u m e n t maintains t h a t m a n y o f t h e

c o n c l u s i o n s drawn by B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken a b o u t g e n e t i c influence a s s u m e

t h a t m o n o z y g o t i c a n d dizygotic twins raised t o g e t h e r develop in identical en-

v i r o n m e n t s . T h e s e critics m a i n t a i n t h a t such an assumption is n o t valid a n d

t h a t f r a t e r n a l twins a r e t r e a t e d far m o r e differendy t h a n a r e identical twins.

This, they c o n t e n d , draws t h e e n t i r e m e t h o d of twin r e s e a r c h as a d e t e r m i -

n a n t o f g e n e t i c influences i n t o question. However, several o t h e r articles have

r e f u t e d this criticism a n d s u p p o r t e d t h e "equal e n v i r o n m e n t assumption"

(e.g., K e n d l e r e t al., 1 9 9 3 ) .

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

I n 1 9 9 9 , B o u c h a r d reviewed t h e n a t u r e - n u r t u r e e v i d e n c e f r o m t h e Minnesota

twin registries ( B o u c h a r d , 1 9 9 9 ) . H e c o n c l u d e d that, overall, 4 0 % o f the vari-

ability in personality a n d 5 0 % of t h e variability in intelligence a p p e a r s to be

genetically based. He also r e i t e r a t e d his position, discussed previously, that

y o u r g e n e s drive y o u r selection o f e n v i r o n m e n t s a n d y o u r selection o r avoid-

a n c e o f specific personality-molding e n v i r o n m e n t s a n d behaviors.

R e s e a r c h a t t h e M i n n e s o t a C e n t e r for Twin a n d A d o p t i o n R e s e a r c h c o n -

tinues t o b e v e r y active. S o m e fascinating r e s e a r c h has e x a m i n e d very c o m -

p l e x h u m a n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d behaviors t h a t few would have even guessed to

be genetically driven, such as love, d i v o r c e , a n d even d e a t h (see M i n n e s o t a

Twin Family Study, 2 0 0 7 ) . T h e y have studied people's selection of a m a t e to

see if "falling in love" with Mr. or Ms. R i g h t is genetically predisposed. It t u r n s

o u t t h a t it is n o t . However, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s have f o u n d a g e n e t i c link to t h e

likelihood o f d i v o r c e , eating disorders, a n d a g e a t t h e t i m e o f d e a t h .

B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken's r e s e a r c h has b e e n applied t o t h e l a r g e r philo-

sophical discussion o f h u m a n c l o n i n g ( s e e Agar, 2 0 0 3 ) . I f a h u m a n being i s

ever successfully c l o n e d , t h e question is, as y o u a r e probably thinking, to what

e x t e n t will a p e r s o n ' s e s s e n c e , an individual's personality, be t r a n s f e r r e d to his

o r h e r c l o n e ? T h e fear t h a t h u m a n identity m i g h t b e c h a n g e d , d e g r a d e d , o r

lost has b e e n a c o m m o n a r g u m e n t o f t h o s e o p p o s e d t o cloning. O n t h e o t h e r

Reading 4 Watch out for the Visual Cliff! 27

h a n d , results of twin studies, such as those of B o u c h a r d a n d Lykken suggest

t h a t "the c l o n e d p e r s o n may, u n d e r c e r t a i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s , be seen as surviv-

ing, t o s o m e d e g r e e , i n t h e c l o n e . . . . However... r a t h e r t h a n w a r r a n t i n g c o n -

c e r n , t h e potential for survival by c l o n i n g o u g h t to h e l p p r o t e c t against t h e

misuse of t h e technology" (Agar, 2 0 0 3 , p. 9 ) . In a s e p a r a t e study e x a m i n i n g

t h e issue of identical twins a n d c l o n i n g ( P r a i n s a c k & Spector, 2 0 0 6 ) , r e -

s e a r c h e r s f o u n d that identical twins rarely c o n s i d e r t h e g e n e t i c aspects o f

their real-life e x p e r i e n c e of being identical twins. In addition, f r o m a p e r s o n a l

perspective, they did n o t view t h e i d e a of h u m a n c l o n i n g as u n n a t u r a l or im-

m o r a l but w e r e m o r e c o n c e r n e d a b o u t t h e ethics underlying t h e reasons for

h u m a n cloning. Of c o u r s e , this is philosophical discussion so far, b u t as t h e

p r o s p e c t of h u m a n c l o n i n g l o o m s ever closer, it b e c o m e s increasingly i m p o r -

tant a n d interesting food for t h o u g h t .

Agar, N. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Cloning and identity. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 28, 9 - 2 6 . Arvey, R., Bouchard, T., Segal, N., & Abraham, L. ( 1 9 8 9 ) . J o b satisfaction: Environmental and ge-

netic components. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(2), 1 8 7 - 1 9 5 . Arvey, R., McCall, B., Bouchard, T., & Taubman, P. ( 1 9 9 4 ) . Genetic influences on j o b satisfaction

and work value. Personality and Individual Differences, 17(1), 2 1 - 3 3 . Billings, P., Beckwith, J . , & Alper, J. ( 1 9 9 2 ) . The genetic analysis of human behavior: A new era?

Social Science and Medicine, 35(3), 2 2 7 - 2 3 8 . Bouchard, T. ( 1 9 9 4 ) . Genes, environment, and personality. Science, 2 6 4 ( 5 1 6 6 ) , 1 7 0 0 - 1 7 0 2 . Bouchard, T. ( 1 9 9 9 ) . Genes, environment, and personality. In S. Ceci, et al. (Eds.), The nature-

nurture debate: The essential readings, pp. 9 7 - 1 0 3 . Maiden, MA: Blackwell. J o s e p h . J . ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Twin studies in psychiatry and psychology: Science or pseudoscience? Psychiatric

Quarterly, 73, 7 1 - 8 2 . Kendler K., Neale M., Kessler R., Heath A., & Eaves L. ( 1 9 9 3 ) . A test of the equal environment as-

sumption in twin studies of psychiatric illness. Behavioral Genetics, 23, 2 1 - 2 7 . Loehlin,J. ( 1 9 9 2 ) . Genes and environment in personality development. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publi-

cations. Minnesota Twin Family Study ( 2 0 0 7 ) . What's spcial about twins to science? Retrieved March 10,

2007 from http://www.psych.umn.edu/psylabs/mtfs/special.htm. Prainsack, B., & Spector, T. D. ( 2 0 0 6 ) . Twins: a cloning experience. Social Science & Medicine,

63(10), 2 7 3 9 - 2 7 5 2 .

Reading 4: WATCH OUT FOR THE VISUAL CLIFF! Gibson, E. J . , & Walk, R. D. (1960). The "visual cliff." Scientific American,

202(A), 67-71.

O n e of t h e m o s t often told a n e c d o t e s in psychology c o n c e r n s a m a n called

S. B. (initials used to p r o t e c t his privacy). S. B. h a d b e e n blind his e n t i r e life

until t h e age of 5 2 , when he u n d e r w e n t a newly developed o p e r a t i o n ( t h e now-

c o m m o n c o r n e a l transplant) a n d his sight was r e s t o r e d . However, S. B.'s new

ability to see did n o t m e a n that he automatically perceived what he saw the way

the rest o f u s d o . O n e i m p o r t a n t e x a m p l e o f this b e c a m e evident soon after t h e

o p e r a t i o n , before his vision h a d c l e a r e d completely. S. B. looked o u t his hospi-

tal window a n d was curious a b o u t t h e small objects he c o u l d see moving on t h e

g r o u n d below. He b e g a n to crawl o u t on his window ledge, thinking he would

28 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

lower himself down by his h a n d s a n d have a look. Fortunately, t h e hospital staff

p r e v e n t e d h i m f r o m trying this. He was on t h e fourth floor, a n d those small

moving things were cars! Even t h o u g h S. B. c o u l d now see, he was n o t able to

perceive d e p t h .

O u r visual ability t o sense a n d i n t e r p r e t t h e world a r o u n d u s i s a n a r e a o f

interest to e x p e r i m e n t a l psychologists b e c a u s e , obviously, it affects o u r behav-

ior in i m p o r t a n t ways. In addition, within this ability lies t h e c e n t r a l question

o f w h e t h e r o u r sensory p r o c e s s e s a r e i n b o r n o r l e a r n e d : t h e n a t u r e - n u r t u r e

issue o n c e again. Many psychologists believe that o u r m o s t i m p o r t a n t visual

skill is d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n . You c a n i m a g i n e how difficult, a n d probably impos-

sible, survival of t h e h u m a n species would have b e e n if we could n o t perceive

d e p t h . W e m i g h t have r u n h e a d l o n g into things, b e e n u n a b l e t o j u d g e how far

away a p r e d a t o r was, or s t e p p e d right off eliffs. T h e r e f o r e , it m i g h t be logical

to a s s u m e t h a t d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n is an i n b o r n survival m e c h a n i s m that d o e s

n o t r e q u i r e e x p e r i e n c e t o develop. However, a s E l e a n o r Gibson a n d R i c h a r d

Walk p o i n t o u t in t h e i r article:

Human infants at the creeping and toddling stage are notoriously prone to falls from more or less high places. They must be kept from going over the brink by side panels on their cribs, gates on stairways, and the vigilance of adults. As their muscular coordination matures, they begin to avoid such accidents on their own. Common sense might suggest that the child learns to recognize falling-off places by experience—that is, by falling and hurting himself" (p. 6 4 ) .

T h e s e r e s e a r c h e r s wanted to study this visual ability of d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n

scientifically in t h e l a b o r a t o r y . To do this, they c o n c e i v e d of a n d developed a

r e m a r k a b l e r e s e a r c h tool they called t h e visual cliff.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

If you wanted to find o u t at what p o i n t in t h e early d e v e l o p m e n t a l p r o c e s s an-

imals or p e o p l e a r e able to p e r c e i v e d e p t h , o n e way to do this would be to p u t

t h e m on t h e e d g e of a cliff a n d see if they a r e able to avoid falling off. This is

a ridiculous suggestion b e c a u s e o f t h e ethical c o n s i d e r a t i o n s o f t h e potential

injury to p a r t i c i p a n t s w h o w e r e u n a b l e to perceive d e p t h (or, m o r e specifi-

cally, h e i g h t ) . T h e visual cliff avoids this p r o b l e m b e c a u s e it presents t h e par-

ticipant with what a p p e a r s to be a drop-off, when no drop-off actually exists.

E x a c t l y how this is d o n e will be e x p l a i n e d shordy, but it is i m p o r t a n t first to

r e c o g n i z e t h a t t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f this a p p a r a t u s lies i n t h e fact t h a t h u m a n o r

a n i m a l infants c a n be p l a c e d on t h e visual cliff to see if they a r e able to per-

ceive t h e drop-off a n d avoid it. If they a r e u n a b l e to do this a n d step off t h e

"cliff," t h e r e is no d a n g e r of falling.

Gibson a n d Walk t o o k a "nativist" position on this topic: they believed that

d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n a n d t h e avoidance of a drop-off a p p e a r automatically as p a r t

o f o u r original biological e q u i p m e n t a n d a r e not, t h e r e f o r e , p r o d u c t s o f experi-

e n c e . T h e opposing view, held by empiricists, c o n t e n d s that such abilities are

l e a r n e d . Gibson a n d Walk's visual cliff allowed t h e m to ask these questions: At

Reading 4 Watch out for the Visual Cliff! 29

what stage in d e v e l o p m e n t can a person or animal r e s p o n d effectively to t h e

stimuli of d e p t h a n d height? Do these responses a p p e a r at different times with

animals of different species a n d habitats? A r e these responses p r e p r o g r a m m e d

at birth or do they develop as a result of e x p e r i e n c e a n d learning?

M E T H O D

T h e visual cliff is c o m p r i s e d of a table a b o u t 4 feet high with a t o p m a d e f r o m

a p i e c e o f thick, c l e a r glass ( F i g u r e s 4-1 a n d 4 - 2 ) . Direcdy u n d e r h a l f o f t h e

glass on t h e table ( t h e shallow side) is a solid surface with a red-and-white

c h e c k e r e d p a t t e r n . U n d e r t h e o t h e r h a l f is t h e s a m e p a t t e r n , but it is down at

the level o f t h e floor u n d e r n e a t h t h e table ( t h e d e e p s i d e ) . A t t h e e d g e o f t h e

shallow side, t h e n , is t h e a p p e a r a n c e of a sudden d r o p - o f f to t h e floor,

a l t h o u g h , in reality, t h e glass e x t e n d s all t h e way across. Between t h e shallow

a n d t h e d e e p sides is a c e n t e r b o a r d a b o u t a foot wide. T h e p r o c e s s of testing

infants using this device was e x t r e m e l y simple.

T h e participants for this study were 36 infants between t h e ages of 6

m o n t h s a n d 1 4 m o n t h s . T h e m o t h e r s o f t h e infants also p a r t i c i p a t e d . E a c h in-

fant was p l a c e d on t h e c e n t e r b o a r d of t h e visual cliff a n d was t h e n called by

t h e m o t h e r , first from the d e e p side a n d t h e n f r o m t h e shallow side.

T o c o m p a r e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n i n h u m a n s with t h a t

in o t h e r baby animals, t h e visual cliff allowed for similar tests with o t h e r

Glass over patterned surface

Deep side Shallow side

FIGURE 4-1 Gibson and Walk's visual cliff. From Introduction to Child Devel-

opment (5th ed.), by J. Dworetzky (c) 1993. Reprinted with permission of

Wadsworth, an imprint of the Wadsworth Group, a division of Thomson Learning.

30 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

FIGURE 4-2 The visual cliff in a testing situation. (Mark

Richards/PhotoEdit/Courtesy of Joe Campos & Rosanne

Kermoian.)

species (without a m o t h e r ' s b e c k o n i n g , h o w e v e r ) . T h e baby animals w e r e

p l a c e d o n t h e c e n t e r b o a r d a n d o b s e r v e d t o see i f they c o u l d discriminate be-

tween t h e shallow a n d d e e p sides a n d avoid stepping off "the cliff." You c a n

i m a g i n e t h e r a t h e r u n i q u e situation in t h e psychology labs at C o r n e l l Univer-

sity when t h e various baby a n i m a l s w e r e b r o u g h t in for testing. T h e y i n c l u d e d

chicks, turtles, rats, lambs, kids (baby goats, that is), pigs, kittens, a n d puppies.

O n e has to w o n d e r if they w e r e all tested on t h e s a m e day!

R e m e m b e r that t h e goal o f this r e s e a r c h was t o e x a m i n e w h e t h e r d e p t h

p e r c e p t i o n is l e a r n e d or i n n a t e . W h a t m a k e s this m e t h o d so ingenious is t h a t

it allowed t h a t question to at least begin to be answered. Infants, w h e t h e r

h u m a n or a n i m a l , c a n n o t be asked if they p e r c e i v e d e p t h , a n d , as m e n t i o n e d ,

h u m a n infants c a n n o t be tested on real cliffs. In psychology, answers to p e r -

plexing questions a r e often f o u n d t h r o u g h t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f new m e t h o d s

for studying t h e questions. T h e results of Gibson a n d Walk's early study p r o -

vide a n e x c e l l e n t e x a m p l e o f this.

R E S U L T S A N D D I S C U S S I O N

N i n e c h i l d r e n in t h e study refused to m o v e at all off t h e c e n t e r b o a r d . This

was n o t e x p l a i n e d by t h e r e s e a r c h e r s , b u t p e r h a p s it was j u s t infant stubborn-

ness. W h e n t h e m o t h e r s o f t h e o t h e r 2 7 called t o t h e m f r o m t h e shallow side,

all t h e infants crawled o f f t h e b o a r d a n d c r o s s e d t h e glass. Only t h r e e of t h e m ,

however, c r e p t , with g r e a t hesitation, off t h e brink of t h e visual cliff when

called by t h e i r m o t h e r s f r o m t h e d e e p side. W h e n called f r o m t h e "cliff side,

m o s t o f t h e c h i l d r e n e i t h e r crawled away f r o m t h e m o t h e r o n t h e shallow side

Reading 4 Watch out for the Visual Cliff! 31

o r c r i e d i n frustration a t b e i n g u n a b l e t o r e a c h t h e m o t h e r without moving

over t h e "cliff." T h e r e was litde question t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n w e r e perceiving t h e

d e p t h of t h e "cliff." "Often they would p e e r down t h r o u g h t h e glass of t h e

d e e p side a n d t h e n b a c k away. O t h e r s would p a t t h e glass with t h e i r h a n d s , yet

despite this tactile a s s u r a n c e of solidity would refuse to cross" ( p . 6 4 ) .

Do these results p r o v e that h u m a n s ' ability to p e r c e i v e d e p t h is i n n a t e

r a t h e r than l e a r n e d ? It d o e s n o t , b e c a u s e all t h e c h i l d r e n in this study h a d at

least 6 m o n t h s of life e x p e r i e n c e in which to l e a r n a b o u t d e p t h t h r o u g h trial

a n d e r r o r . However, h u m a n infants c a n n o t be tested in this way p r i o r to 6

m o n t h s o f a g e b e c a u s e they d o n o t have a d e q u a t e l o c o m o t o r abilities. I t was

for this r e a s o n t h a t Gibson a n d Walk d e c i d e d to test various o t h e r animals as a

c o m p a r i s o n . As you know, m o s t n o n h u m a n animals gain t h e ability to m o v e

a b o u t m u c h s o o n e r than h u m a n s . T h e results o f t h e a n i m a l tests w e r e e x -

tremely interesting, in t h a t t h e ability of t h e various a n i m a l s to p e r c e i v e d e p t h

developed in relation to when t h e species n e e d e d s u c h a skill for survival.

F o r e x a m p l e , baby c h i c k e n s m u s t begin t o s c r a t c h for t h e i r own f o o d

s o o n after h a t c h i n g . W h e n they were tested on t h e visual cliff at less t h a n 24

h o u r s o f a g e , they n e v e r m a d e t h e mistake o f stepping off o n t o t h e d e e p side.

Kids a n d lambs a r e able to stand a n d walk very s o o n after birth. F r o m

t h e m o m e n t they first stood u p , t h e i r r e s p o n s e on t h e visual cliff was as a c c u -

r a t e a n d p r e d i c t a b l e a s that o f t h e chicks. N o t o n e e r r o r was m a d e . W h e n o n e

o f t h e r e s e a r c h e r s p l a c e d a one-day-old baby g o a t o n t h e d e e p side o f t h e

glass, t h e g o a t b e c a m e f r i g h t e n e d a n d froze in a defensive p o s t u r e . If it was

t h e n p u s h e d over t h e shallow side, i t would r e l a x a n d j u m p f o r w a r d o n t o t h e

seemingly solid surface. This indicated t h a t t h e visual sense was in c o m p l e t e

c o n t r o l a n d that t h e animals' ability to feel t h e solidity of t h e glass on t h e d e e p

side h a d no effect on t h e r e s p o n s e .

F o r t h e rats, it was a different story. T h e y did n o t a p p e a r to show any sig-

nificant p r e f e r e n c e for t h e shallow side of t h e table. W h y do y o u suppose this

difference was f o u n d ? B e f o r e you c o n c l u d e t h a t rats a r e j u s t stupid, c o n s i d e r

Gibson a n d Walk's m u c h m o r e likely e x p l a n a t i o n : a r a t d o e s n o t d e p e n d very

m u c h on vision to survive. B e c a u s e it is n o c t u r n a l , a r a t locates food by smell

a n d moves a r o u n d in t h e dark using c u e s f r o m t h e stiff whiskers on its n o s e .

So when a r a t was p l a c e d on t h e c e n t e r b o a r d , it was n o t fooled by t h e visual

cliff b e c a u s e it was n o t using vision to d e c i d e which way to g o . To t h e rat's

whiskers, t h e glass on t h e d e e p side felt t h e s a m e as t h e glass on t h e shallow

side a n d , thus, t h e rat was just as likely to m o v e off t h e c e n t e r b o a r d to t h e

d e e p side as to t h e shallow side.

You m i g h t e x p e c t t h e s a m e results f r o m kittens. T h e y a r e basically n o c -

turnal a n d have sensitive whiskers. However, cats a r e p r e d a t o r s , n o t scav-

e n g e r s like rats. T h e r e f o r e , they d e p e n d m o r e on vision. A n d , accordingly,

kittens were found to have e x c e l l e n t d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n as s o o n as they w e r e

able to m o v e on their own: at a b o u t 4 weeks.

A l t h o u g h at times this r e s e a r c h article, a n d this discussion, risk sound-

ing like a children's a n i m a l story, it has to be r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e species with

32 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

t h e worst p e r f o r m a n c e on t h e visual cliff was t h e turtle. T h e baby turtles c h o -

sen t o b e tested w e r e o f t h e a q u a t i c variety b e c a u s e t h e r e s e a r c h e r s e x p e c t e d

t h a t they m i g h t p r e f e r t h e d e e p side of t h e "cliff b e c a u s e their natural envi-

r o n m e n t is water. However, it a p p e a r e d t h a t t h e turtles were "smart" e n o u g h

to know that they w e r e n o t in water: 7 6 % of t h e m crawled off o n t o t h e shallow

side, while 2 4 % went "over t h e e d g e . " ' T h e relatively large minority that c h o s e

t h e d e e p side suggests e i t h e r t h a t this turtle has p o o r e r d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n t h a n

o t h e r animals, or its n a t u r a l habitat gives it less o c c a s i o n to 'fear' a fall"

( p . 6 7 ) . Clearly, if you live y o u r life in water, t h e survival value of d e p t h p e r -

c e p t i o n , in t e r m s of avoiding falls, would be diminished.

Gibson a n d Walk p o i n t e d o u t t h a t all of t h e i r observations were consis-

t e n t with evolutionary theory. T h a t is, all species of animals, if they a r e to sur-

vive, n e e d to develop t h e ability to p e r c e i v e d e p t h by the time they achieve

i n d e p e n d e n t m o v e m e n t . F o r h u m a n s , this d o e s n o t o c c u r until a r o u n d

6 m o n t h s of age; but for c h i c k e n s a n d g o a t s it is nearly i m m e d i a t e (by 1 day

o l d ) ; a n d for rats, cats, a n d dogs, it is a b o u t 4 weeks of age. T h e a u t h o r s c o n -

c l u d e , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t this capacity is i n b o r n b e c a u s e to l e a r n it t h r o u g h trial

a n d e r r o r would c a u s e t o o m a n y potentially fatal accidents.

If we a r e so well p r e p a r e d biologically, why do c h i l d r e n take so m a n y

falls? Gibson a n d Walk e x p l a i n e d that t h e h u m a n infants' p e r c e p t i o n o f d e p t h

h a d m a t u r e d s o o n e r than h a d their skill in m o v e m e n t . During testing, m a n y

of t h e infants s u p p o r t e d themselves on t h e d e e p side of t h e glass as they

t u r n e d o n t h e c e n t e r b o a r d , a n d s o m e even b a c k e d u p o n t o the d e e p side a s

they b e g a n to crawl toward t h e m o t h e r across t h e shallow side. If t h e glass h a d

n o t b e e n t h e r e , s o m e o f t h e c h i l d r e n would have fallen off t h e "clifF!

C R I T I C I S M S A N D S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H

T h e m o s t c o m m o n criticism o f t h e r e s e a r c h e r s ' conclusions revolves a r o u n d the

question of w h e t h e r they really proved that d e p t h perception is innate in hu-

m a n s . As m e n t i o n e d , by t h e time infants were tested on the visual cliff, they h a d

already l e a r n e d to avoid such situations. A later study placed y o u n g e r infants,

ages 2 to 5 m o n t h s , on the glass over t h e d e e p side of the visual cliff. W h e n this

h a p p e n e d , all t h e babies showed a d e c r e a s e in h e a r t rate. Such a d e c r e a s e is

t h o u g h t to be a sign of interest, n o t fear, which is a c c o m p a n i e d by h e a r t rate in-

creases ( C a m p o s et al., 1 9 7 8 ) . This indicates that these y o u n g e r infants h a d n o t

yet l e a r n e d to fear t h e drop-off a n d would learn the avoidance behavior some-

what later. T h e s e findings a r g u e d against Gibson a n d Walk's position.

It is i m p o r t a n t to n o t i c e , however, that although t h e r e was a n d still is c o n -

troversy over j u s t w h e n we a r e able to perceive d e p t h ( t h e nativists vs. t h e e m -

piricists) , m u c h of t h e r e s e a r c h t h a t is d o n e to find t h e answer i n c o r p o r a t e s t h e

visual cliff a p p a r a t u s developed by Gibson a n d Walk. In addition, o t h e r related

r e s e a r c h using t h e visual cliff has t u r n e d up s o m e fascinating findings.

O n e e x a m p l e is t h e work of S o r c e et al. ( 1 9 8 5 ) , who p u t 1-year-old in-

fants on a visual cliff for which t h e d r o p - o f f was n e i t h e r shallow n o r d e e p but

in between ( a b o u t 30 i n c h e s ) . As a baby crawled toward t h e "cliff," it would

Reading 4 Watch out for the Visual Cliff! 33

stop a n d look down. On t h e o t h e r side, as in t h e Gibson a n d Walk study, t h e

m o t h e r was waiting. S o m e t i m e s t h e m o t h e r h a d b e e n i n s t r u c t e d t o m a i n t a i n

a n e x p r e s s i o n o f fear o n h e r face, while o t h e r times t h e m o t h e r l o o k e d h a p p y

a n d interested. W h e n infants saw t h e e x p r e s s i o n of fear, they refused to crawl

any farther. However, m o s t of t h e infants w h o saw t h e i r m o t h e r looking happy

c h e c k e d t h e "cliff again a n d crawled across. W h e n t h e drop-off was m a d e flat,

t h e infants did n o t c h e c k with the m o t h e r b e f o r e crawling across. This

m e t h o d of n o n v e r b a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n used by infants in d e t e r m i n i n g t h e i r be-

havior is called social referencing.

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Gibson a n d Walk's g r o u n d b r e a k i n g invention of t h e visual cliff still e x e r t s a

m a j o r influence o n c u r r e n t studies o f h u m a n d e v e l o p m e n t , p e r c e p t i o n , e m o -

tion, a n d even m e n t a l h e a l t h . Following is a b r i e f sample.

A study by B e r g e r a n d A d o l p h ( 2 0 0 3 ) cited Gibson a n d Walk's early study

in their r e s e a r c h on how toddlers analyze t h e characteristics of tasks involving

heights, specifically crossing over a bridge. T h e r e s e a r c h e r s c o a x e d very young

toddlers ( 1 6 m o n t h s ) to cross bridges of various widths, s o m e with handrails,

s o m e without. T h e y found that t h e children were significandy m o r e likely to

cross wider bridges than n a r r o w e r o n e s (pretty s m a r t for 16 m o n t h s ! ) . M o r e in-

teresting, however, was the finding that t h e toddlers were m o r e likely to at-

t e m p t the n a r r o w bridge if it h a d handrails. "Infants w h o e x p l o r e d t h e b r i d g e

a n d handrail before stepping o n t o the bridge a n d devised alternative bridge-

crossing strategies were m o r e likely to cross successfully. [ T h e s e ] results chal-

lenge traditional conceptualizations of tools: babies used the handrail as a

m e a n s for a u g m e n t i n g b a l a n c e a n d for c a r r y i n g o u t an otherwise impossible

goal-directed task" ( p . 5 9 4 ) .

A n o t h e r p r a c t i c a l application of t h e visual cliff study l o o k e d at t h e possi-

bilities for using virtual reality to help developmentally disabled c h i l d r e n

learn to deal safely with t h e physical e n v i r o n m e n t a r o u n d t h e m . Strickland

( 1 9 9 6 ) developed a system that i n c o r p o r a t e s virtual reality to help autistic

c h i l d r e n safely e x p l o r e a n d i n t e r a c t with t h e world a r o u n d t h e m . Often these

children pose a d a n g e r to themselves b e c a u s e t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s a r e e i t h e r dis-

t o r t e d o r n o t fully developed. F o r e x a m p l e , a n autistic child m i g h t n o t p e r -

ceive d r o p o f f s such as those r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e visual cliff a n d would,

t h e r e f o r e , be p r o n e to d a n g e r o u s falls. A c c o r d i n g to Strickland, however, vir-

tual reality allows us to design c u s t o m p r o g r a m s so e a c h individual child may

gain valuable m o t o r e x p e r i e n c e without d a n g e r o f physical injury.

C O N C L U S I O N

T h r o u g h t h e inventiveness o f Gibson a n d Walk, behavioral scientists have

b e e n able to study d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n in a c l e a r a n d systematic way. B e h a v i o r a l

scientists c o n t i n u e t o d e b a t e t h e q u e s t i o n o f w h e t h e r this a n d o t h e r p e r c e p -

tual abilities a r e i n n a t e or l e a r n e d . T h e t r u t h may lie in a c o m p r o m i s e t h a t

34 Chapter I Biology and Human Behavior

p r o p o s e s a n i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e e n n a t u r e a n d n u r t u r e . P e r h a p s , a s v a r i o u s

studies have i n d i c a t e d , d e p t h p e r c e p t i o n i s p r e s e n t a t b i r t h , b u t f e a r o f

falling a n d a v o i d a n c e o f d a n g e r a r e l e a r n e d t h r o u g h e x p e r i e n c e , after t h e in-

fant is old e n o u g h to crawl a r o u n d e n o u g h to "get i n t o trouble." B u t what-

e v e r t h e q u e s t i o n s a r e , e l e g a n t m e t h o d o l o g i c a l a d v a n c e s such a s t h e visual

cliff allow us to c o n t i n u e to s e a r c h f o r answers.

Berger, S., & Adolph, K. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Infants use handrails as tools in a locomotor task. Developmental Psychology, 39, 5 9 4 - 6 0 5 .

Campos,!., Hiatt, S., Ramsay, D., Henderson, C, & Svejda, M. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . The emergence of fear on the visual cliff. In M. Lewis & L. A. Rosenblum (Eds.), The development of affect. New York: Plenum Press.

Sorce, J . , Emde, R., Campos, J . , & Klinnert, M. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Maternal emotion signaling: Its effect on the visual cliff behavior of 1-year-olds. Developmental Psychology, 21, 1 9 5 - 2 0 0 .

Strickland, D. ( 1 9 9 6 ) . A virtual-reality application with autistic children. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 5(3), 3 1 9 - 3 2 9 .

PERCEPTION AND CONSCIOUSNESS

R e a d i n g 5 T A K E A L O N G L O O K

R e a d i n g 6 T O S L E E P , N O D O U B T T O D R E A M

R e a d i n g 7 U N R O M A N C I N G T H E D R E A M

R e a d i n g 8 A C T I N G A S I F Y O U A R E H Y P N O T I Z E D

T h e study o f p e r c e p t i o n a n d consciousness i s o f g r e a t interest t o psychologists

b e c a u s e these activities define a n d reveal m u c h o f y o u r psychological i n t e r a c -

tion with y o u r e n v i r o n m e n t . T h i n k for a m o m e n t a b o u t how y o u r senses a r e

b o m b a r d e d c o n s t a n d y b y millions o f p i e c e s o f i n f o r m a t i o n from t h e c o m -

bined stimuli that s u r r o u n d you at any given m o m e n t . It is impossible for y o u r

brain to p r o c e s s all of it, so y o u r brain organizes this b a r r a g e of sensory d a t a

into sets of i n f o r m a t i o n that yield f o r m a n d m e a n i n g . T h a t ' s what psycholo-

gists r e f e r to as perception.

Clearly, y o u r level of consciousness, also c o m m o n l y r e f e r r e d to as y o u r

state of awareness, g o v e r n s to a l a r g e e x t e n t what you p erceive a n d how y o u r

brain organizes it. As you go t h r o u g h y o u r day, night, week, year, a n d life, you

e x p e r i e n c e many a n d varied states o f awareness: y o u c o n c e n t r a t e ( o r n o t ) ,

d a y d r e a m , fantasize, sleep, d r e a m ; maybe you've b e e n hypnotized at s o m e

point o r used psychoactive d r u g s (even caffeine a n d n i c o t i n e a r e psychoactive

d r u g s ! ) . T h e s e varying m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n s a r e all a l t e r e d states o f conscious-

ness that p r o d u c e c h a n g e s in y o u r p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e world that, in t u r n , in-

fluence y o u r behavior.

Within the r e s e a r c h a r e a s o f p e r c e p t i o n a n d consciousness, s o m e o f t h e

m o s t influential a n d interesting studies have focused on p e r c e p t u a l abilities in

early c h i l d h o o d , sleep, d r e a m s , a n d hypnosis. This section begins with a fa-

m o u s a n d influential study t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d a brilliant a n d r e m a r k a b l e

m e t h o d that allows r e s e a r c h e r s to study t h e thinking processes, t h e perceptions,

of preverbal infants as y o u n g as a few days old. T h i s m e t h o d , called preference

looking, provides insights into t h e f u n c t i o n i n g of infants' brains a n d how they

c o n c e p t u a l i z e the world. T h e s e c o n d r e a d i n g c o n t a i n s two articles t h a t

c h a n g e d psychology b e c a u s e they ( 1 ) discovered r a p i d eye m o v e m e n t ( R E M )

sleep a n d ( 2 ) revealed t h e relationship between R E M a n d d r e a m i n g . T h i r d i s

an influential a n d controversial study p r o p o s i n g t h a t d r e a m s a r e n o t mysteri-

ous messages from y o u r u n c o n s c i o u s , a s F r e u d a n d o t h e r s suggested ( a n d a s

you probably believe), b u t r a t h e r t h a t d r e a m s a r e t h e result o f purely r a n d o m ,

35

36 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

e l e c t r o c h e m i c a l impulses firing off in y o u r brain while you sleep. F o u r t h is

o n e o f m a n y studies that have influenced traditional psychological thinking

by m a k i n g a case against t h e widespread belief that hypnosis is a u n i q u e a n d

powerful a l t e r e d state of consciousness. This last study offers e v i d e n c e sug-

gesting t h a t hypnotized p e o p l e a r e n o different f r o m normally awake p e o -

ple—they a r e j u s t a bit m o r e motivated to behave in certain ways.

Reading 5: TAKE A LONG LOOK Fantz, R. L. (1961). The origin of form perception. Scientific American,

204(May), 61-72.

I f you want t o know a b o u t o t h e r people's p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e world a r o u n d

t h e m , an easy way to find o u t is to ask t h e m . Depending, of c o u r s e , on e x a c d y

what you ask, they will often tell you. B u t have you ever tried to ask this of an

infant? As m u c h as infants may s e e m , at times, to be trying to tell you what

they a r e thinking a n d perceiving, they c a n n o t ; they c a n ' t talk; they probably

c o u l d n o t tell you very m u c h if they could; a n d , m o s t likely, they c o u l d n ' t even

u n d e r s t a n d y o u r question!

If you have h a d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to s p e n d time a r o u n d infants ( a n d you

all likely have to varying d e g r e e s ) , you m a y have often t h o u g h t to yourself, "I

w o n d e r what this baby is thinking!" or "If only this baby c o u l d talk . . . ." U n -

fortunately, that's n o t going to h a p p e n ( J o h n Travolta's series of Look Who's

Talking movies a s i d e ) . B u t psychologists' interest in studying a n d u n d e r s t a n d -

ing infants has b e e n a t o p priority t h r o u g h o u t psychology's history (this b o o k

c o n t a i n s seven studies t h a t have focused on infants).

However, in R o b e r t Fantz's discoveries that we will discuss in this c h a p -

ter, t h e questions t h a t p l a g u e d t h e r e s e a r c h e r s w e r e "How c a n we study an in-

fant's cognitive processes?" "How c a n we c a t c h a real glimpse inside very

y o u n g babies' brains to see what m i g h t be g o i n g o n , what they a r e perceiving,

a n d how m u c h they really u n d e r s t a n d ? "

In t h e 1 9 5 0 s , R o b e r t L. F a n t z , a psychologist at W e s t e r n R e s e r v e Univer-

sity in Cleveland (now, Case W e s t e r n R e s e r v e University), n o t i c e d s o m e t h i n g

very interesting a b o u t infants; however, these were n o t h u m a n infants b u t

newly h a t c h e d c h i c k s — t h a t ' s right: c h i c k e n s . Fantz r e p o r t e d t h a t almost im-

mediately u p o n b r e a k i n g o u t o f t h e i r shell, chicks p e r c e i v e t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t

well e n o u g h to begin s e a r c h i n g a n d p e c k i n g for food. ( S e e "Watch O u t for

t h e Visual Cliff!" in t h e previous g r o u p of r e a d i n g s for m o r e a b o u t t h e per-

c e p t u a l talents of chicks.) T h i s suggested to Fantz t h a t chicks, in s o m e ways,

actually have s u p e r i o r p e r c e p t u a l abilities t h a n h u m a n infants, making t h e

chicks ideal subjects for r e s e a r c h in this a r e a . T h a t said, it is i m p o r t a n t to n o t e

t h a t w h e n psychologists study n o n h u m a n animals, their ultimate goal is to

apply what they l e a r n to o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of human behavior, but we will fur-

t h e r discuss that issue later.

Reading 5 Take a Long Look . 37

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

P r i o r t o Fantz's studies, r e s e a r c h h a d clearly d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t h u m a n infants

a r e able to perceive t h e world a r o u n d t h e m in s o m e r u d i m e n t a r y ways, such

as t h e ability to see light, discriminate basic c o l o r s , a n d d e t e c t m o v e m e n t .

However, as Fantz p o i n t e d out, "It has often b e e n a r g u e d that they c a n n o t r e -

spond to such stimuli as s h a p e , p a t t e r n , size, or solidity; in short, they c a n n o t

perceive form" ( p . 6 6 ) . B u t Fantz was skeptical of this a r g u m e n t , so in t h e late

1 9 5 0 s a n d early 1 9 6 0 s he set a b o u t developing a new r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e that

would allow r e s e a r c h e r s to study in g r e a t e r detail what infants c a n perceive; to

pinpoint when p e r c e p t u a l skills develop; a n d t o d e t e r m i n e t h e d e g r e e o f c o m -

plexity o f their p e r c e p t u a l skills. H e p r o p o s e d t h a t h u m a n infants, f r o m t h e

m o m e n t o f birth, n o t entirely unlike newly h a t c h e d chicks, a r e actually able t o

perceive various forms, a n d this c a n be d e m o n s t r a t e d by observing how babies

"analyze" t h e i r w o r l d — t h a t is, what they look at a n d for how long they look at it.

This m e t h o d of studying infants' m e n t a l abilities, called preferential looking,

swept t h r o u g h t h e psychology world a n d b e g a n a revolution, t h a t c o n t i n u e s

today, into u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h e m i n d s of infants.

M E T H O D

It wasn't difficult for F a n t z to d e m o n s t r a t e s o m e of what newly h a t c h e d chicks

could a n d c o u l d n o t p e r c e i v e . F a n t z simply p r e s e n t e d t h e chicks, b e f o r e they

h a d any e x p e r i e n c e p e c k i n g for real food, with objects of different shapes a n d

sizes a n d r e c o r d e d how often they p e c k e d at e a c h o n e . T h e y p e c k e d signifi-

cantly m o r e often a t r o u n d shapes versus pyramid shapes; circles m o r e t h a n

triangles; s p h e r e s m o r e than flat disks; a n d when shapes of various sizes of cir-

cles were p r e s e n t e d , they p r e f e r r e d those that w e r e a b o u t -g- inch in d i a m e t e r

over l a r g e r or smaller sizes. W i t h o u t any previous learning, chicks were able to

perceive f o r m , a n d they clearly p r e f e r r e d shapes m o s t like potential food:

seeds o r grain.

Fantz e x p r e s s e d in his article what you a r e probably thinking right now:

"Of c o u r s e , what holds t r u e for birds d o e s n o t necessarily apply to h u m a n be-

ings" ( p . 6 7 ) . He c o n s i d e r e d t h e possibility that this i n n a t e ability in birds to

perceive f o r m ( a n d this is t r u e of m a n y bird species) may n o t have d e v e l o p e d

during t h e evolution o f p r i m a t e s (including h u m a n s ) , o r t h a t p e r h a p s pri-

m a t e s a c q u i r e such abilities only after a p e r i o d of d e v e l o p m e n t or l e a r n i n g

following birth. So, when Fantz t u r n e d his attention to p r i m a t e infants, he

n e e d e d a new r e s e a r c h m e t h o d b e c a u s e , obviously, p r i m a t e infants do n o t

p e c k at anything, a n d they d o n ' t have t h e m o t o r d e v e l o p m e n t to do so even if

they a r e so inclined (which they a r e n ' t b e c a u s e infants a r e n o t terribly fond of

grain a n d s e e d s ) .

Infants do e n g a g e in o n e behavior, however, that m i g h t allow t h e m to be

tested in a similar way to t h e chicks: they stare at things. If Fantz c o u l d figure

out a way to see if they stare at s o m e forms predictably m o r e often or l o n g e r

than others, t h e only e x p l a n a t i o n would be that they c o u l d tell t h e difference,

38 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

that they c o u l d perceive f o r m . Working at first with infant chimpanzees, t h e

p r i m a t e genetically m o s t closely r e l a t e d to h u m a n s , Fantz a n d his associates d e -

veloped what he called a "looking c h a m b e r , " which was basically a p a d d e d ,

c o m f o r t a b l e bassinette inside of a large, plain b o x . In the top panel of t h e b o x

were two o p e n i n g s for presenting objects to t h e infants a n d p e e p h o l e s allowing

t h e r e s e a r c h e r s to observe t h e looking behavior of the infants. W h e n t h e r e -

s e a r c h e r s a s c e r t a i n e d that infant c h i m p s a p p e a r e d to show a systematic prefer-

e n c e for c e r t a i n objects over o t h e r s ( d e t e r m i n e d by duration of s t a r i n g ) , they

applied t h e same basic t e c h n i q u e s to studying h u m a n babies.

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s did n o t h i n g to i n t e r f e r e with t h e babies' usual s c h e d u l e

or activities b u t simply p l a c e d t h e infants into t h e c o m f o r t a b l e , p a d d e d view-

ing b o x a n d p r e s e n t e d various pairs o f o b j e c t for t h e m t o look at. T h e infants

r a n g e d in a g e f r o m 1 to 15 weeks of a g e . T h e stimuli p r e s e n t e d to t h e babies

i n c l u d e d solid a n d t e x t u r e d disks; spheres; an oval with a h u m a n face; an oval

with t h e features o f a h u m a n face j u m b l e d up; a n d shapes a n d p a t t e r n s o f

varying c o m p l e x i t y (see F i g u r e 5 - 1 ) . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s revealed t h e objects i n

various p a i r e d c o m b i n a t i o n s a n d o b s e r v e d t h e total a m o u n t o f t i m e d u r i n g

e a c h 1-minute trial t h e infants spent staring at t h e different pairs of objects, as

well as which o b j e c t within e a c h p a i r they "preferred" (stared at l o n g e r ) .

T h e i r findings p r o v i d e d powerful e v i d e n c e that babies of all ages possess t h e

ability to p e r c e i v e a n d discriminate a m o n g diverse forms.

FIGURE 5-1 Infants' inter- est in form pairs as a func- tion of average looking time

0 5 10 15 20 for 220 tests. (Source: Fantz, Average Seconds of Fixation in 1-Minute Test 1961, p. 70.)

Reading 5 Take a Long Look . . . 39

R E S U L T S

F o r their first r o u n d of testing, t h e babies saw pairs of various black-and-white

test p a t t e r n s , including a square with horizontal stripes a n d a s q u a r e with a

bull's-eye; a c h e c k e r b o a r d a n d a plain, n o - p a t t e r n square; a wide plus-sign a n d

a circle; a n d a pair of identical triangles as c o n t r o l stimuli. T h e results a r e

graphically illustrated in F i g u r e 5-1. Clearly t h e infants "preferred" t h e f o r m s

with the greatest complexity ( t h e bull's-eye, stripes, a n d c h e c k e r b o a r d ) . This

d e g r e e of p r e f e r e n c e was t h e s a m e , regardless of the infant's age, which indicates

that the ability to discriminate a m o n g these f o r m s is i n n a t e , p r e s e n t at birth.

Beginning at a p p r o x i m a t e l y 8 weeks of a g e , t h e infants p r e f e r r e d t h e bull's-eye

to the stripes a n d the c h e c k e r b o a r d to t h e plain square. This time delay implies

that either s o m e learning has o c c u r r e d in those 2 m o n t h s or that m a t u r a t i o n

o f the brain a n d / o r visual system a c c o u n t e d for t h e c h a n g e .

As interesting as these findings w e r e , an i m p o r t a n t link between t h e in-

fants' abilities a n d t h e e a r l i e r studies of t h e chicks was still missing. If h u m a n

infants a r e b o r n with an u n l e a r n e d , n a t u r a l ability to d i s c r i m i n a t e f o r m , we

must ask why. F o r chicks, t h e answer a p p e a r s r a t h e r straightforward: they p e r -

ceive t h e f o r m s that allow t h e m to find n o u r i s h m e n t a n d to survive. H o w

c o u l d such an i n n a t e ability to p e r c e i v e specific f o r m s have survival value for

h u m a n infants? Maybe it is for a similar r e a s o n . F a n t z wrote:

In the world of the infant, people have an importance that is perhaps compara- ble to the importance of grain in the chick's world. Facial pattern is the most dis- tinctive aspect of a person . . . for distinguishing a human being from other objects and identifying him. So, a facelike pattern might be expected to bring out selective perception in an infant if anything could (p. 7 0 ) .

I n o t h e r words, h u m a n infants d o n o t d e p e n d u p o n f o r m p e r c e p t i o n for

n o u r i s h m e n t a n d survival; they d e p e n d o n o t h e r people t o c a r e for t h e m . J u s t

as chicks c a n perceive specific shapes best, it would m a k e sense t h a t infants'

p e r c e p t u a l t e n d e n c i e s should favor t h e h u m a n face. A n d it does.

Fantz's t e a m p r e s e n t e d 49 infants between 4 days a n d 6 m o n t h s old with

t h r e e identically sized oval disks. O n e was p a i n t e d with t h e features of a

h u m a n face, a n o t h e r with t h o s e s a m e features s c r a m b l e d , a n d t h e third, t h e

c o n t r o l disk, an oval with j u s t a p a t c h of black at o n e e n d equal to t h e total

a r e a o f t h e facial features o n t h e o t h e r two disks (see F i g u r e 5 - 2 ) . T h e infants

a b c

FIGURE 5-2 Fantz's Facial Figure Test. Infants preferred A over B, and strongly preferred A and B over C. (Source: Fantz, 1961, p. 7 2 )

40 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

50

Percent of Total Fixation Time

FIGURE 5-3 Infants' looking time for patterns and colors (black bars = 8 - 1 2 months; grey bars = over 12 months of age). (Source: Fantz, 1961, p. 72.)

clearly showed g r e a t e r interest in t h e ovals with t h e facial features a n d stared

at t h e m i n t e n d y while virtually i g n o r i n g t h e c o n t r o l oval. Moreover, this pref-

e r e n c e was a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e s a m e s t r e n g t h for all infants regardless of age,

d e m o n s t r a t i n g again that basic f o r m p e r c e p t i o n is p r e s e n t at birth a n d ruling

o u t a l e a r n i n g or d e v e l o p m e n t a l factor.

In t h e final study r e p o r t e d in this article, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s tested t h e

h u m a n infants again for t h e i r ability to r e c o g n i z e facial f o r m s . T h e infants

w e r e p r e s e n t e d with six flat disks, e a c h 6 inches in d i a m e t e r with the following

designs: ( 1 ) a h u m a n face; ( 2 ) a bull's-eye; ( 3 ) a r a n d o m f r a g m e n t of a

p r i n t e d p a g e (such a s a n e w s p a p e r o r t e x t b o o k ) ; ( 4 ) entirely r e d ; ( 5 ) entirely

fluorescent yellow; a n d ( 6 ) plain white. T h e time of t h e infants' first look at

e a c h disk was r e c o r d e d . W h i c h o n e do you think they looked at t h e most? If

you said "the face," y o u a r e c o r r e c t ; they gazed at t h e h u m a n face disk far

m o r e t h a n any o t h e r f o r m o r c o l o r (see F i g u r e 5 - 3 ) .

S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H A N D R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

This study, like so m a n y in this book, significandy c h a n g e d psychology for two

reasons: t h e g r o u n d b r e a k i n g discoveries a n d t h e m e t h o d t h e r e s e a r c h e r de-

veloped t o m a k e t h o s e discoveries possible. Until t h e m i d d l e o f t h e 2 0 t h c e n -

tury, m a n y behavioral a n d b i o m e d i c a l r e s e a r c h e r s assumed t h a t babies were

b o r n with few if any p e r c e p t u a l or sensory abilities a n d t h a t they d e v e l o p e d or

l e a r n e d most, if n o t all, of these skills as they i n t e r a c t e d with t h e i r environ-

m e n t over time. This i d e a of t h e psychologically "empty" n e w b o r n was rela-

Reading 5 Take a Long Look . . . 41

tively easy to a c c e p t b e c a u s e we did n o t , at t h e time, possess t h e n e c e s s a r y r e -

search m e t h o d o l o g i e s to reveal very y o u n g infants' t r u e capabilities. F a n t z

gave us preferential-looking m e t h o d s that, quite literally, o p e n e d t h e d o o r s to

t h e m i n d of t h e infant. T h i s m e t h o d is u s e d so c o m m o n l y today t h a t it is to

psychology what a m i c r o s c o p e is to biology: o n e of t h e first tools r e s e a r c h e r s

t u r n to when they want to study how babies think. Of c o u r s e , t h e discovery

that infants c o m e into t h e world with various p e r c e p t u a l skills d o e s n o t r e d u c e

t h e i m p o r t a n c e of l e a r n i n g a n d d e v e l o p m e n t . B u t t h e inborn skills r e s e a r c h e r s

have discovered using Fantz's m e t h o d s a p p e a r to set t h e stage for an infant's

future survival a n d growth. As Fantz points out:

Innate knowledge of the environment is demonstrated by the preference of newly hatched chicks for forms likely to be edible and by the interest of young infants in kinds of forms that will later aid in object recognition, social respon- siveness, and spatial orientation. This primitive knowledge provides a founda- tion for the vast accumulation of knowledge through experience, (p. 72)

Fantz's discoveries ignited a r e s e a r c h revolution i n t o t h e p e r c e p t u a l abilities

o f infants. You c a n see t h e influence o f Fantz's m e t h o d o l o g i c a l ingenuity

t h r o u g h o u t t h e fields o f d e v e l o p m e n t a l a n d cognitive psychology. F o r e x a m -

ple, s o m e of t h e leading r e s e a r c h e r s in t h e world in t h e a r e a of infant cogni-

tion, such as R e n e e Baillargeon at t h e University of Illinois's Infant C o g n i t i o n

L a b a n d Elizabeth Spelke a t H a r v a r d ' s L a b o r a t o r y for D e v e l o p m e n t a l Studies,

have m a d e extensive use of Fantz's p r e f e r e n c e - l o o k i n g r e s e a r c h strategies in

m a n y studies (see Talbot, 2 0 0 6 , for a review of this w o r k ) . In addition, Fantz's

work h e l p e d clarify when a n d how well babies c a n p e r c e i v e d e p t h a n d d r o p -

offs as studied in g r e a t e r detail by Gibson a n d Walk in t h e i r classic r e s e a r c h in-

c o r p o r a t i n g t h e visual cliff (see C h a p t e r I ) .

Probably the most i m p o r t a n t extension of Fantz's work is c r e d i t e d to

F r a n c e s Horowitz at t h e University of Kansas, who discovered that in addition to

preferential looking, babies also b e c o m e b o r e d seeing t h e same stimulus over

and over (Horowitz, & P a d e n et al., 1 9 7 2 ) . W h e n you show infants a novel visual

pattern (such as those used in Fantz's studies), they gaze at it for a given a m o u n t

of time, but as you repeatedly present the same stimulus, the a m o u n t of time

they look predictably decreases. This is called habituation. If you t h e n c h a n g e or

alter the p a t t e r n , their interest appears to revive a n d they look at it longer, a r e -

sponse known as dishabituation. By c o m b i n i n g preferential looking, habituation,

a n d dishabituation methodologies, r e s e a r c h e r s can now learn a g r e a t deal

about what very young infants, even newborns, "know" a b o u t their world.

F o r e x a m p l e , in a r e c e n t study, researchers wanted to see when h u m a n s ac-

quire the ability to distinguish between "possible" objects a n d "impossible" ob-

jects (Shuwarai, Albert, & J o h n s o n , 2 0 0 7 ) . You undoubtedly have seen so<alled

impossible objects that we often refer to as optical illusions. Figure 5-4 exempli-

fies the difference between a possible a n d impossible object. You looked l o n g e r

at the impossible o n e , didn't you? So do babies. Using preferential-looking

and duration-of-gaze methods, the researchers found that infants as young a

4 m o n t h s old indicate an awareness of the difference in that they stared at the

42 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

FIGURE 5-4 Babies can distinguish between a possible (a) and impossible (b) object at 4 months old.

impossible object longer, as if to say, "I c a n see something's wrong with this object

a n d I n e e d to try to figure it out!"

This is j u s t a sample of h u n d r e d s of studies c o n d u c t e d every year by de-

v e l o p m e n t a l psychologists a n d o t h e r behavioral scientists whose f u n d a m e n t a l

m e t h o d o l o g i e s rest on R o b e r t Fantz's discoveries. T h e s e m e t h o d s a r e allowing

us to p e e k inside t h e minds of infants as never before to see what they perceive

a n d how they think. Virtually every time we take a n o t h e r look, we discover that

they a r e "smarter" a n d perceive m o r e of their world than we ever e x p e c t e d .

Horowitz, F. D., Paden, L., Bhana, K., & Self, P. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . An infant-controlled procedure for study- ing infant visual fixations. Developmental Psychology, 7, 90.

Shuwairi, S., Albert, M., & Johnson, S. ( 2 0 0 7 ) . Discrimination of possible and impossible objects in infancy. Psychological Science, 18(4), 3 0 3 - 3 0 7 .

Talbot, M. ( 2 0 0 6 , September 4 ) . The baby lab. The New Yorker, 82(27), 9 1 - 1 0 1 .

Reading 6: TO S L E E P , NO DOUBT TO DREAM .. . Aserinsky, E., & Kleitman, N. (1953). Regularly occurring periods of eye mobility and

concomitant phenomena during sleep. Science, 118, 273-274. Dement, W. (1960).

The effect of dream deprivation. Science, 131,1705-1707.

As y o u c a n see, this section is s o m e w h a t different f r o m t h e o t h e r s in t h a t two

articles a r e discussed; this is so b e c a u s e t h e first study discovered a basic p h e -

n o m e n o n a b o u t sleeping a n d d r e a m i n g that m a d e t h e s e c o n d study possible.

T h e p r i m a r y focus i s William D e m e n t ' s work o n d r e a m deprivation, b u t t o

p r e p a r e y o u for that, Aserinsky's findings m u s t be addressed first.

In 1 9 5 2 , E u g e n e Aserinsky, a l t h o u g h a g r a d u a t e student, was studying

sleep. P a r t of his r e s e a r c h involved observing sleeping infants. He n o t i c e d t h a t

as these infants slept, active eye m o v e m e n t s o c c u r r e d periodically. During t h e

r e m a i n d e r of t h e night, only occasional slow, rolling eye m o v e m e n t s o c c u r r e d .

H e theorized that these p e r i o d s o f active eye m o v e m e n t s m i g h t b e associated

with d r e a m i n g . However, infants c o u l d n o t tell h i m w h e t h e r they h a d b e e n

d r e a m i n g or not. To test this idea, he e x p a n d e d his r e s e a r c h to include adults.

Reading 6 To Sleep, No Doubt to Dream . . . 43

Aserinsky a n d his coauthor, Nathaniel Kleitman, employed 20 n o r m a l

adults to serve as participants. Sensitive electronic measuring devices were con-

n e c t e d by electrodes to the muscles a r o u n d the eyes of these participants. T h e

leads from these electrodes stretched into the n e x t r o o m , w h e r e t h e participants'

sleep could be m o n i t o r e d . T h e participants were then allowed to fall asleep nor-

mally (participants participated on m o r e than o n e night e a c h ) . During t h e

night, participants were awakened a n d interrogated, either during periods of eye

activity or during periods when little or no eye m o v e m e n t was observed. T h e idea

was to wake the participants a n d ask t h e m if they h a d been d r e a m i n g a n d if they

could r e m e m b e r the c o n t e n t of the d r e a m . T h e results were quite revealing.

F o r all t h e participants c o m b i n e d , a total of 27 awakenings were d o n e dur-

ing periods of sleep a c c o m p a n i e d by rapid eye movements. Of these, 20 r e -

p o r t e d detailed visual dreams. T h e o t h e r 7 r e p o r t e d "the feeling of having

d r e a m e d " but could n o t recall t h e c o n t e n t in detail. During periods of no eye

movement, 23 awakenings were instigated; in 19 of these instances, t h e partici-

pants did n o t r e p o r t any d r e a m i n g , while in t h e o t h e r four, t h e participants felt

vaguely as if they might have b e e n d r e a m i n g , but they were n o t able to describe

any dreams. On s o m e occasions, participants were allowed to sleep t h r o u g h t h e

night u n i n t e r r u p t e d . It was found that the latter g r o u p e x p e r i e n c e d between

t h r e e a n d four periods of eye activity during t h e average of 7 hours of sleep.

A l t h o u g h it may n o t have s e e m e d so r e m a r k a b l e at t h e time, Aserinsky

h a d discovered what is very familiar to m o s t of us now: r a p i d eye m o v e m e n t

( R E M ) sleep, o r d r e a m i n g sleep. F r o m his discovery grew a h u g e body o f r e -

s e a r c h o n sleep a n d d r e a m i n g that c o n t i n u e s t o e x p a n d . O v e r t h e years, a s r e -

s e a r c h m e t h o d s a n d physiological r e c o r d i n g devices have b e c o m e m o r e

sophisticated, we have b e e n able to refine Aserinsky's findings a n d u n l o c k

m a n y o f t h e mysteries o f sleep.

F o r e x a m p l e , we now know that after you fall asleep, you sleep in f o u r

stages, beginning with t h e lightest sleep (Stage 1) a n d p r o g r e s s i n g into

d e e p e r a n d d e e p e r stages. After you r e a c h t h e d e e p e s t stage (Stage 4 ) , y o u

begin t o move back u p t h r o u g h t h e stages: y o u r sleep b e c o m e s lighter a n d

lighter. As you a p p r o a c h Stage 1 again, you e n t e r R E M , which is a very differ-

e n t kind o f sleep. You d o m o s t o f y o u r d r e a m i n g d u r i n g R E M sleep. However,

c o n t r a r y t o p o p u l a r belief, r e s e a r c h has revealed that you d o n o t m o v e

a r o u n d very m u c h during R E M . Y o u r body is immobilized by e l e c t r o c h e m i c a l

messages f r o m your brain t h a t paralyze y o u r muscles. This is m o s t likely an

evolutionary survival m e c h a n i s m that prevents you f r o m a c t i n g o u t y o u r

d r e a m s a n d possibly injuring yourself o r worse.

Following a s h o r t p e r i o d in R E M , you p r o c e e d b a c k i n t o t h e four stages

o f sleep called non-rapid-eye-movement sleep ( N O N - R E M , o r N R E M ) . Dur-

ing t h e night, you cycle between N R E M a n d R E M a b o u t five or six times (your

first R E M p e r i o d c o m e s a b o u t 9 0 m i n u t e s after falling a s l e e p ) , with N R E M be-

c o m i n g s h o r t e r a n d R E M b e c o m i n g l o n g e r ( t h e r e b y causing you t o d r e a m

m o r e toward m o r n i n g ) . (By t h e way, e v e r y o n e d r e a m s . A l t h o u g h a small p e r -

c e n t a g e o f individuals never r e m e m b e r d r e a m s , sleep r e s e a r c h has d e t e r -

m i n e d that we all have t h e m . )

44 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

All this knowledge springs f r o m t h e discovery of R E M by Aserinsky in

t h e early 1 9 5 0 s . A n d o n e o f t h e leading r e s e a r c h e r s who followed Aserinsky i n

giving us this wealth of i n f o r m a t i o n on sleeping a n d d r e a m i n g is William De-

m e n t o f Stanford University. B e g i n n i n g a r o u n d t h e t i m e o f Aserinsky's f i n d -

ings, D e m e n t was beginning his d e c a d e s of g r o u n d b r e a k i n g r e s e a r c h i n t o

sleeping a n d d r e a m i n g .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

W h a t struck D e m e n t as m o s t significant was t h e discovery t h a t d r e a m i n g o c -

c u r s every night in e v e r y o n e . As D e m e n t states in his article, "Since t h e r e a p -

p e a r t o b e n o e x c e p t i o n s t o t h e nightly o c c u r r e n c e o f a substantial a m o u n t o f

d r e a m i n g in every sleeping p e r s o n , it m i g h t be asked w h e t h e r or n o t this

a m o u n t of d r e a m i n g is in s o m e way a - n e c e s s a r y a n d vital p a r t of o u r exis-

t e n c e " ( p . 1 7 0 5 ) . This led h i m to ask s o m e obvious questions: "Would it be

possible for h u m a n beings to c o n t i n u e to function n o r m a l l y if t h e i r d r e a m life

w e r e c o m p l e t e l y o r partially suppressed? Should d r e a m i n g b e c o n s i d e r e d n e c -

essary in a psychological sense or a physiological sense or both?" ( p . 1 7 0 5 ) .

D e m e n t d e c i d e d to try to answer these questions by studying partici-

p a n t s w h o h a d s o m e h o w b e e n deprived o f t h e c h a n c e t o d r e a m . A t f i r s t h e

tried using d e p r e s s a n t d r u g s to p r e v e n t d r e a m i n g , but t h e d r u g s themselves

p r o d u c e d t o o g r e a t a n effect o n t h e participants' sleep p a t t e r n s t o allow for

valid results. Finally, he d e c i d e d on a novel m e t h o d of preventing d r e a m i n g by

waking p a r t i c i p a n t s up every time they e n t e r e d R E M sleep during t h e night.

M E T H O D D R A S T I C

D e m e n t ' s article r e p o r t e d on t h e first eight participants in an o n g o i n g sleep

a n d d r e a m i n g r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t . T h e participants were all males r a n g i n g in a g e

f r o m 23 to 3 2 . A p a r t i c i p a n t would arrive at t h e sleep l a b o r a t o r y a r o u n d his

usual b e d t i m e . Small e l e c t r o d e s were a t t a c h e d t o t h e scalp a n d n e a r t h e eyes

to r e c o r d brain-wave p a t t e r n s a n d eye m o v e m e n t s . As in t h e Aserinsky study,

t h e wires t o these e l e c t r o d e s r a n into t h e n e x t r o o m s o t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t

c o u l d sleep in a quiet, d a r k e n e d r o o m .

T h e p r o c e d u r e for t h e study was a s follows: F o r t h e f i r s t several nights,

t h e p a r t i c i p a n t was allowed to sleep n o r m a l l y for t h e e n t i r e night. T h i s was

d o n e t o establish a baseline for e a c h p a r t i c i p a n t ' s usual a m o u n t o f d r e a m -

ing a n d overall sleep p a t t e r n . O n c e this i n f o r m a t i o n was o b t a i n e d , t h e n e x t

s t e p was t o d e p r i v e t h e p a r t i c i p a n t o f R E M o r d r e a m sleep. O v e r t h e n e x t

several nights ( t h e n u m b e r o f c o n s e c u t i v e d e p r i v a t i o n nights r a n g e d f r o m

t h r e e t o seven for t h e various p a r t i c i p a n t s ) , t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r would awaken

t h e p a r t i c i p a n t every t i m e t h e i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m t h e e l e c t r o d e s i n d i c a t e d t h a t

h e h a d b e g u n t o d r e a m . T h e p a r t i c i p a n t was r e q u i r e d t o sit u p i n bed a n d

d e m o n s t r a t e t h a t he was fully awake f o r several m i n u t e s b e f o r e being allowed

t o g o b a c k t o sleep.

An i m p o r t a n t p o i n t m e n t i o n e d by D e m e n t was that t h e participants

w e r e asked n o t to sleep at any o t h e r times d u r i n g t h e d r e a m study. This was

Reading 6 To Sleep, No Doubt to Dream . . . 45

TABLE 6-1 Summary of Dream-Deprivation Results

1. 2. 3a. 3b. 4. 5. PERCENT NUMBER NUMBER OF PERCENT PERCENT DREAM OF DREAM AWAKENINGS DREAM- DREAM-

TIME: BASE- DEPRIVATION FIRST LAST OF TIME: OF TIME: PARTICIPANT LINE NIGHTS NIGHT NIGHT RECOVERY CONTROL

1. 19.5 5 8 14 34.0 15.6 2. 18.8 7 7 24 34.2 22.7 3. 19.5 5 11 30 17.8 20.2 4. 18.6 5 7 23 26.3 18.8 5. 19.3 5 10 20 29.5 26.3 6. 20.8 4 13 20 29.0 — 7. 17.9 4 22 30 19.8 (28.1)* 16.8 8. 20.8 3 9 13 * *

Average 19.5 4.38 11 22 26.6 20 1

"Second recovery night. "Participant dropped out of study before recovery nights. (Adapted from p. 1707)

b e c a u s e i f participants slept o r n a p p e d , they m i g h t d r e a m , a n d this c o u l d c o n -

t a m i n a t e t h e findings of t h e study.

Following t h e nights o f d r e a m deprivation, p a r t i c i p a n t s e n t e r e d t h e

recovery phase of t h e e x p e r i m e n t . D u r i n g these nights, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e al-

lowed t o sleep u n d i s t u r b e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e night. T h e i r p e r i o d s o f d r e a m i n g

c o n t i n u e d t o b e m o n i t o r e d electronically, a n d t h e a m o u n t o f d r e a m i n g was

r e c o r d e d as usual.

N e x t , e a c h p a r t i c i p a n t was given several nights off ( s o m e t h i n g they

were v e r y glad a b o u t , n o d o u b t ! ) . T h e n six o f t h e m r e t u r n e d t o t h e lab for

a n o t h e r series o f i n t e r r u p t e d nights. T h e s e awakenings "exactly d u p l i c a t e d

t h e d r e a m - d e p r i v a t i o n nights i n n u m b e r o f nights a n d n u m b e r o f awaken-

ings p e r night. T h e only difference was t h a t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t was a w a k e n e d in

t h e intervals between e y e - m o v e m e n t ( d r e a m ) p e r i o d s . W h e n e v e r a d r e a m

p e r i o d b e g a n , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t was allowed to sleep on without i n t e r r u p t i o n

a n d was a w a k e n e d only after t h e d r e a m h a d e n d e d spontaneously" ( p . 1 7 0 6 ) .

P a r t i c i p a n t s again h a d t h e s a m e n u m b e r o f r e c o v e r y nights a s they did fol-

lowing t h e d r e a m - d e p r i v a t i o n p h a s e . T h e s e w e r e called control recovery a n d

were i n c l u d e d t o e l i m i n a t e t h e possibility t h a t any effects o f d r e a m depriva-

tion w e r e n o t d u e simply t o being a w a k e n e d m a n y t i m e s d u r i n g t h e night,

w h e t h e r d r e a m i n g o r not.

R E S U L T S

Table 6-1 summarizes the main findings r e p o r t e d . During t h e baseline nights,

when participants were allowed to sleep undisturbed, t h e average a m o u n t of

sleep p e r night was 6 hours a n d 50 minutes. T h e average a m o u n t of time t h e

46 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

participants spent d r e a m i n g was 8 0 minutes, o r 1 9 . 5 % (see Table 1 , c o l u m n 1 ) .

D e m e n t discovered in these results f r o m t h e first several nights t h a t t h e

a m o u n t of time spent d r e a m i n g was remarkably similar from p a r t i c i p a n t to

participant. In fact, t h e a m o u n t of variation a m o n g the d r e a m e r s was only plus

or m i n u s 7 minutes!

T h e m a i n p o i n t o f this study was t o e x a m i n e the effects o f being de-

prived o f d r e a m i n g , o r R E M , sleep. T h e f i r s t finding t o address this was t h e

n u m b e r o f awakenings r e q u i r e d t o p r e v e n t R E M sleep d u r i n g t h e d r e a m -

deprivation nights. As y o u c a n see in Table 6-1 ( c o l u m n 3 a ) , on t h e first night,

t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r h a d to awaken t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s between 7 a n d 22 times in

o r d e r t o block R E M . However, a s t h e study p r o g r e s s e d , participants h a d t o b e

a w a k e n e d m o r e a n d m o r e often i n o r d e r t o p r e v e n t t h e m f r o m d r e a m i n g . O n

t h e last deprivation night, t h e n u m b e r o f f o r c e d awakenings r a n g e d f r o m 1 3

t o 3 0 ( c o l u m n 3 b ) . O n a v e r a g e , t h e r e w e r e twice a s m a n y a t t e m p t s t o d r e a m a t

t h e e n d o f t h e deprivation nights.

T h e n e x t a n d p e r h a p s m o s t revealing result was t h e i n c r e a s e i n d r e a m -

ing t i m e after t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were p r e v e n t e d f r o m d r e a m i n g for several

nights. T h e n u m b e r s i n Table 6-1 ( c o l u m n 4 ) reflect t h e f i r s t r e c o v e r y night.

T h e a v e r a g e total d r e a m time o n this night was 1 1 2 minutes, o r 2 6 . 6 % ( c o m -

p a r e d with 8 0 m i n u t e s a n d 1 9 . 5 % d u r i n g baseline nights i n c o l u m n 1 ) . De-

m e n t p o i n t e d o u t t h a t two p a r t i c i p a n t s did n o t show a significant i n c r e a s e in

R E M ( p a r t i c i p a n t s 3 a n d 7 ) . I f they a r e e x c l u d e d f r o m t h e calculations, t h e av-

e r a g e total d r e a m time is 1 2 7 minutes, or 2 9 % . This is a 5 0 % i n c r e a s e o v e r t h e

a v e r a g e for t h e baseline nights.

A l t h o u g h only t h e first r e c o v e r y night is r e p o r t e d in Table 6-1, it was

n o t e d that m o s t o f t h e participants c o n t i n u e d t o show elevated d r e a m t i m e

( c o m p a r e d with baseline a m o u n t s ) for five consecutive nights.

"Wait a minute!" you're thinking. Maybe this increase in d r e a m i n g has

nothing to do with R E M deprivation at all. Maybe it's just b e c a u s e these partici-

pants were awakened so often. You'll r e m e m b e r that D e m e n t p l a n n e d for your

astute observation. Six of the participants r e t u r n e d after several days of rest a n d

r e p e a t e d the p r o c e d u r e exacdy, e x c e p t they were awakened between R E M peri-

ods ( t h e same n u m b e r of times). This p r o d u c e d no significant increases in

d r e a m i n g . T h e average time spent d r e a m i n g after t h e c o n t r o l awakenings was

8 8 minutes, o r 2 0 . 1 % o f t h e total sleep time ( c o l u m n 5 ) . W h e n c o m p a r e d t o 8 0

minutes, or 1 9 . 5 % , in c o l u m n 1, no significant difference was found.

D I S C U S S I O N

D e m e n t tentatively c o n c l u d e d f r o m these findings that we n e e d to d r e a m .

W h e n w e a r e n o t allowed t o d r e a m , t h e r e seems t o b e s o m e kind o f pressure t o

d r e a m that increases over successive dream-deprivation nights. This was evi-

d e n t in his findings from t h e increasing n u m b e r of a t t e m p t s to d r e a m follow-

ing deprivation ( c o l u m n 3a vs. c o l u m n 3 b ) a n d in t h e significant i n c r e a s e in

d r e a m time ( c o l u m n 4 vs. c o l u m n 1 ) . He also n o t e s t h a t this i n c r e a s e c o n t i n u e s

Reading 6 To Sleep, No Doubt to Dream . 47

over several nights so that it a p p e a r s to m a k e up in quantity t h e a p p r o x i m a t e

a m o u n t o f lost d r e a m i n g . Although D e m e n t did n o t use t h e p h r a s e a t t h e d m e ,

this i m p o r t a n t finding has c o m e to be known as t h e REM-rebound effect.

Several interesting additional discoveries were m a d e in this brief, yet r e -

m a r k a b l e article. If you r e t u r n to Table 6-1 for a m o m e n t , you'll see t h a t two

participants, as m e n t i o n e d b e f o r e , did n o t show a significant R E M - r e b o u n d

effect (participants 3 a n d 7 ) . It is always i m p o r t a n t in r e s e a r c h i n c o r p o r a t i n g

a relatively small n u m b e r of p a r t i c i p a n t s to a t t e m p t to e x p l a i n these e x c e p -

tions. D e m e n t f o u n d that t h e small i n c r e a s e in p a r t i c i p a n t 7 was n o t difficult

to explain: "His failure to show a rise on t h e first r e c o v e r y n i g h t was in all like-

lihood d u e to t h e fact that he h a d imbibed several cocktails at a party b e f o r e

c o m i n g to the laboratory, so t h e e x p e c t e d i n c r e a s e in d r e a m time was offset by

the depressing effect o f t h e a l c o h o l " ( p . 1 7 0 6 ) .

P a r t i c i p a n t 3, however, was m o r e difficult to r e c o n c i l e . A l t h o u g h he

showed t h e largest i n c r e a s e in t h e n u m b e r of awakenings d u r i n g deprivation

(from 7 t o 3 0 ) , h e did n o t have any R E M r e b o u n d o n any o f his f i v e r e c o v e r y

nights. D e m e n t a c k n o w l e d g e d that this p a r t i c i p a n t was t h e o n e e x c e p t i o n in

his findings a n d t h e o r i z e d that p e r h a p s he h a d an unusually stable sleep pat-

tern that was resistant to c h a n g e .

T h e eight participants were m o n i t o r e d for any behavioral c h a n g e s t h a t

they might e x p e r i e n c e d u e to t h e loss of R E M sleep. All t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s de-

veloped m i n o r symptoms of anxiety, irritability, or difficulty c o n c e n t r a t i n g

during the R E M i n t e r r u p t i o n p e r i o d . Five of the p a r t i c i p a n t s r e p o r t e d a c l e a r

i n c r e a s e in a p p e t i t e d u r i n g t h e deprivation, a n d 3 of these g a i n e d 3 to 5

pounds. N o n e o f these behavioral symptoms a p p e a r e d d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d o f

c o n t r o l awakenings.

S I G N I F I C A N C E O F T H E F I N D I N G S A N D S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H

M o r e than 40 years after this p r e l i m i n a r y r e s e a r c h by D e m e n t , we know a

g r e a t deal a b o u t sleeping a n d d r e a m i n g . S o m e of this knowledge was dis-

cussed briefly a n d previously in this c h a p t e r . We know t h a t m o s t of what De-

m e n t r e p o r t e d in his 1 9 6 0 article has s t o o d t h e test of time. We all d r e a m , a n d

i f w e a r e s o m e h o w p r e v e n t e d f r o m d r e a m i n g o n e night, w e d r e a m m o r e t h e

n e x t night. T h e r e d o e s i n d e e d a p p e a r t o b e s o m e t h i n g basic i n o u r n e e d t o

d r e a m . In fact, t h e R E M - r e b o u n d effect c a n be seen in m a n y animals.

O n e o f D e m e n t ' s a c c i d e n t a l f i n d i n g s , o n e that h e r e p o r t e d only a s a

m i n o r a n e c d o t e , now has g r e a t e r significance. O n e way that p e o p l e may b e

deprived o f R E M sleep i s t h r o u g h t h e use o f a l c o h o l o r o t h e r d r u g s , such a s

a m p h e t a m i n e s a n d barbiturates. A l t h o u g h these d r u g s i n c r e a s e y o u r ten-

d e n c y to fall asleep, they suppress R E M sleep a n d c a u s e you to r e m a i n in t h e

d e e p e r stages o f N R E M for g r e a t e r p o r t i o n s o f t h e night. F o r this r e a s o n m a n y

p e o p l e a r e u n a b l e to b r e a k t h e habit of taking sleeping pills or a l c o h o l in

o r d e r to sleep. As soon as they stop, t h e R E M - r e b o u n d effect is so s t r o n g a n d

disturbing that they b e c o m e afraid to sleep a n d r e t u r n to t h e d r u g to avoid

48 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

d r e a m i n g . A n even m o r e e x t r e m e e x a m p l e o f this p r o b l e m o c c u r s with alco-

holics w h o m a y have b e e n depriving themselves o f R E M sleep for years. W h e n

they stop drinking, t h e o n s e t of R E M r e b o u n d may be so powerful t h a t it c a n

o c c u r while they a r e awake! T h i s may be an e x p l a n a t i o n for t h e p h e n o m e n o n

known as delirium tremens ( D T s ) , which usually involve terrible a n d frightening

hallucinations d u r i n g withdrawal ( G r e e n b e r g & P e r l m a n , 1 9 6 7 ) .

D e m e n t spent d e c a d e s following up on his early p r e l i m i n a r y findings r e -

g a r d i n g t h e behavioral effects of d r e a m deprivation. In his l a t e r work, he de-

prived p a r t i c i p a n t s o f R E M for m u c h l o n g e r p e r i o d s o f t i m e a n d f o u n d n o

e v i d e n c e o f h a r m f u l c h a n g e s . H e c o n c l u d e d t h a t "[a] d e c a d e o f r e s e a r c h has

failed to p r o v e t h a t substantial ill effects result even f r o m p r o l o n g e d selective

R E M deprivation" ( D e m e n t , 1 9 7 4 ) .

R e s e a r c h with its origins in D e m e n t ' s early work r e p o r t e d h e r e suggests

t h a t a g r e a t e r synthesis of p r o t e i n s takes p l a c e in t h e brain d u r i n g R E M sleep

t h a n d u r i n g N R E M sleep. S o m e believe t h a t these c h e m i c a l c h a n g e s may r e p -

r e s e n t t h e p r o c e s s o f i n t e g r a t i n g new i n f o r m a t i o n i n t o t h e m e m o r y s t r u c t u r e s

of t h e brain a n d may even be t h e o r g a n i c basis for new d e v e l o p m e n t s in per-

sonality (Rossi, 1 9 7 3 ) .

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Most e x p e r t s in t h e field of sleep a n d d r e a m i n g c r e d i t Aserinsky with t h e dis-

c o v e r y of R E M sleep. Most studies relating to sleeping, d r e a m i n g , or sleep dis-

o r d e r s attribute that basic fact to him. Consequendy, his early work with

Kleitman is frequently cited in m a n y r e c e n t scientific articles.

D e m e n t ' s e x t e n s i o n of Aserinsky's work c o n t i n u e s to be cited frequently

in a wide r a n g e of r e s e a r c h articles relating to sleep p a t t e r n s . O n e such r e c e n t

study m a d e t h e r e m a r k a b l e discovery that h u m a n s may d r e a m d u r i n g N R E M

sleep m o r e t h a n w e t h o u g h t (Suzuki, e t al., 2 0 0 4 ) . Using daytime n a p p i n g ,

d u r i n g which w e t e n d t o e n t e r N R E M sleep s o o n e r than d u r i n g n o r m a l night-

t i m e sleep, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s f o u n d t h a t w h e n participants were asked t o r e p o r t

o n d r e a m s d u r i n g n a p s consisting only o f N R E M sleep they w e r e frequently

able t o d o so. However, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s also found that "dream r e p o r t s f r o m

N R E M n a p s w e r e less r e m a r k a b l e in quantity, vividness, a n d e m o t i o n t h a n

t h o s e f r o m R E M naps" ( p . 1 4 8 6 ) .

A n o t h e r article relying o n D e m e n t ' s 1 9 6 0 r e s e a r c h e x a m i n e d R E M dur-

ing daytime sleep, following a night without any sleep at all ( W e r t h et al.,

2 0 0 2 ) . T h e s e r e s e a r c h e r s f o u n d that, c o m p a r e d t o n i g h t t i m e sleep, daytime

sleep p r o d u c e s significantly different R E M p a t t e r n s . F o r e x a m p l e , t h e n u m -

b e r o f awakenings n e e d e d t o p r e v e n t R E M only d o u b l e d a t first a n d t h e n

s t o p p e d increasing completely. Also, participants displayed only a small R E M

r e b o u n d effect ( 1 1 . 6 % c o m p a r e d t o 2 6 . 6 % i n D e m e n t ' s s t u d y ) . T h e s e find-

ings imply t h a t o u r typical p a t t e r n s o f R E M a r e associated with o u r n a t u r a l ,

biological predisposition toward nighttime sleep. In o t h e r words, we h u m a n s

a r e diurnal, n o t nocturnal, c r e a t u r e s .

Reading 7 Unromancing the Dream 49

Reading 7: UNROMANCING THE DREAM Hobson, J. A., & McCarley, R. W. (1977). The brain as a dream-state generator: An

activation-synthesis hypothesis of the dream process. American Journal of Psychia-

try, 134, 1335-1348.

T h e work o f Aserinsky a n d D e m e n t e x p l o r e d t h e a p p a r e n t n e e d for d r e a m i n g

sleep in h u m a n s . O t h e r r e s e a r c h has e x a m i n e d the r e a s o n s why you d r e a m

a n d s o m e o f t h e functions d r e a m i n g m i g h t serve. T h e history o f r e s e a r c h o n

d r e a m i n g has b e e n d o m i n a t e d by t h e belief that d r e a m s reveal s o m e t h i n g

a b o u t yourself: they a r e p r o d u c t s o f y o u r i n n e r psychological e x p e r i e n c e o f

the world. This view c a n be t r a c e d back to S i g m u n d F r e u d ' s psychoanalytic

theories o f h u m a n n a t u r e .

You'll recall that F r e u d believed that d r e a m s a r e t h e expression o f un-

conscious wishes for things we a r e u n a b l e to have while awake. T h e r e f o r e ,

C O N C L U S I O N

In 2000, Dement, who continues to oversee a very active sleep medicine research

p r o g r a m at Stanford University, published, The Promise of Sleep: A Pioneer in Sleep

Medicine Explores the Vital Connection Between Health, Happiness and a Good Night's

Sleep. In this book, written for t h e nonscientist, D e m e n t draws u p o n his four

d e c a d e s of r e s e a r c h on sleep a n d applies his vast a c c u m u l a t i o n of knowledge to

helping all of us u n d e r s t a n d the vital i m p o r t a n c e of quality sleep a n d how to

achieve it. In his book, D e m e n t (2004) describes us as a "sleep-sick society" a n d

sets forth his goals as a sleep r e s e a r c h e r :

For most of my career . . . I have worked unceasingly to change the way society deals with sleep. Why?

Because the current way, or nonway, is so very bad . . . . It greatly saddens me to think about the millions, possibly billions, of people, whose lives could be improved if they understood a few simple principles.

Changing the way society and its institutions deal with sleep will do more good than almost anything else I can conceive, or certainly that was ever re- motely in my grasp to accomplish, (pp. 4 - 5 )

T o l e a r n m o r e a b o u t D e m e n t ' s o n g o i n g w o r k a t S t a n f o r d University's

C e n t e r for H u m a n Sleep R e s e a r c h , see h t t p : / / m e d . s t a n f o r d . e d u / s c h o o l /

p s y c h i a t r y / h u m a n s l e e p .

Dement, W. C. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . Some must watch while some must sleep. San Francisco, CA: Freeman. Dement. W. C. ( 2 0 0 0 ) . The promise of sleep: A pioneer in sleep medicine explores the vital connection be-

tween health, happiness and a good night's sleep. New York: Dell. Greenberg, R., & Perlman, C. ( 1 9 6 7 ) . Delirium tremens and dreaming. American Journal of Psychi-

atry, 124, 1 3 3 - 1 4 2 . Rossi, E. I. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . The dream protein hypothesis. American Journal of Psychiatry, 130, 1 0 9 4 - 1 0 9 7 . Suzuki, H., Uchiyama, M., & Tagaya, H., et al. ( 2 0 0 4 ) . Dreaming during non-rapid eye movement

sleep in the absence of prior rapid eye movement sleep. Sleep, 2 7 ( 8 ) , 1 4 8 6 - 9 0 . Werth, E., Coth, K., Gallman, E., Borbély, A., & Acherman, P. ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Selective REM sleep depri-

vation during daytime—1. Time course interventions and recovery. American Journal of Physiology: Regulatory integrative and comparative physiology, 283, R 5 2 1 - R 5 2 6 .

50 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

d r e a m s offer insights into t h e u n c o n s c i o u s that a r e unavailable in waking

t h o u g h t . However, t h e psychoanalytic a p p r o a c h also c o n t e n d s that m a n y o f

these wishes a r e u n a c c e p t a b l e t o t h e c o n s c i o u s m i n d a n d , i f e x p r e s s e d openly

in d r e a m s , would disrupt sleep a n d c r e a t e anxiety. T h u s , to p r o t e c t t h e indi-

vidual, t h e t r u e desires c o n t a i n e d in t h e d r e a m a r e disguised in t h e d r e a m ' s

i m a g e s by a hypothetical censor. Consequently, t h e t h e o r y asserts that the t r u e

m e a n i n g o f m o s t d r e a m s lies h i d d e n b e n e a t h t h e d r e a m ' s outward a p p e a r -

a n c e . F r e u d called this s u r f a c e m e a n i n g of a d r e a m t h e manifest content a n d

t h e d e e p e r , "hidden" m e a n i n g t h e latent content. In F r e u d ' s view, to reveal t h e

meaningful i n f o r m a t i o n of a d r e a m , t h e manifest c o n t e n t m u s t be inter-

p r e t e d , analyzed, a n d p e n e t r a t e d .

A l t h o u g h t h e validity of a g r e a t p o r t i o n of F r e u d ' s work has b e e n drawn

into serious question by behavioral scientists over t h e past 50 years, his c o n -

ceptualization of d r e a m s r e m a i n s widely a c c e p t e d by W e s t e r n c u l t u r e in gen-

eral. ( S e e R e a d i n g 3 0 o n A n n a F r e u d for a discussion o f o t h e r e n d u r i n g

aspects o f F r e u d ' s t h e o r i e s . ) Almost e v e r y o n e has h a d t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f r e -

m e m b e r i n g an unusual d r e a m a n d thinking "I w o n d e r what it really means!"

W e believe t h a t o u r d r e a m s have d e e p m e a n i n g a b o u t conflicts that a r e hid-

d e n i n t h e u n c o n s c i o u s parts o f o u r psyches.

In t h e late 1 9 7 0 s , Allan H o b s o n a n d R o b e r t McCarley, b o t h psychiatrists

a n d neurophysiologists at H a r v a r d ' s m e d i c a l s c h o o l , published a new t h e o r y

o f d r e a m i n g t h a t s h o o k t h e scientific c o m m u n i t y s o deeply t h a t t h e t r e m o r s

a r e still being felt today. W h a t they said, in essence, was t h a t d r e a m s a r e n o t h -

ing m o r e t h a n y o u r a t t e m p t t o i n t e r p r e t r a n d o m electrical impulses p r o d u c e d

automatically in y o u r brain d u r i n g R E M sleep.

T h e y p r o p o s e d t h a t while you a r e asleep, a p a r t of y o u r brain, l o c a t e d in

t h e brain stem, is periodically activated a n d p r o d u c e s electrical impulses. This

p a r t o f y o u r brain i s r e l a t e d t o physical m o v e m e n t a n d t h e processing o f input

f r o m y o u r senses while you a r e awake. W h e n you a r e asleep, y o u r sensory a n d

m o t o r abilities a r e shut down, b u t this p a r t of y o u r brain is not. It c o n t i n u e s to

g e n e r a t e what H o b s o n a n d M c C a r l e y r e g a r d e d a s meaningless bursts o f

n e u r a l static. S o m e o f these impulses r e a c h o t h e r parts o f y o u r brain, respon-

sible for h i g h e r functions such as thinking a n d reasoning. W h e n this h a p p e n s ,

y o u r brain tries t o synthesize a n d m a k e s o m e sort o f sense o u t o f t h e impulses.

To do this, y o u s o m e t i m e s c r e a t e images, ideas, a n d even stories with plots. If

we awaken a n d r e m e m b e r this cognitive activity, we call it a d r e a m a n d invest

it with all kinds of significance which, a c c o r d i n g to H o b s o n a n d McCarley, was

n e v e r t h e r e .

H o b s o n a n d McCarley's original article, u p o n which this discussion is

based, is a highly t e c h n i c a l a c c o u n t of t h e neurophysiology of sleep a n d

d r e a m i n g . A l t h o u g h t h e i r work c a n be f o u n d in nearly all textbooks that in-

c l u d e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t d r e a m i n g , very little of t h e detail is offered t h e r e ,

d u e t o t h e c o m p l e x n a t u r e o f t h e r e s e a r c h e r s ' r e p o r t i n g . W e e x p l o r e their a r -

ticle in significantly g r e a t e r detail, a l t h o u g h for clarity a n d u n d e r s t a n d i n g ,

c o n s i d e r a b l e distillation a n d simplification a r e unavoidable.

Reading 7 Unromancing the Dream 51

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

H o b s o n a n d M c C a r l e y believed that m o d e r n neurophysiological e v i d e n c e

"permits a n d necessitates i m p o r t a n t revisions in psychoanalytic d r e a m theory.

T h e activadon-synthesis hypothesis . . . asserts t h a t m a n y f o r m a l aspects of t h e

d r e a m e x p e r i e n c e may b e t h e o b l i g a t o r y a n d relatively u n d i s t o r t e d psycho-

logical c o n c o m i t a n t o f the regularly r e c u r r i n g a n d physiologically d e t e r -

m i n e d brain state called ' d r e a m i n g sleep'" ( p . 1 3 3 5 ) . W h a t they m e a n t by this

was simply that d r e a m s a r e t r i g g e r e d automatically by basic physiological

processes, a n d t h e r e is no censor distorting t h e t r u e m e a n i n g to p r o t e c t you

f r o m y o u r u n c o n s c i o u s wishes. Moreover, they c o n t e n d t h a t t h e strangeness

a n d distortions often associated with d r e a m s a r e n o t disguises, b u t r a t h e r they

a r e the results of t h e physiology of how t h e brain a n d m i n d work d u r i n g sleep.

T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f their t h e o r y was that t h e brain b e c o m e s a c -

tivated during R E M sleep a n d g e n e r a t e s its own original i n f o r m a t i o n . T h i s a c -

tivation is t h e n c o m p a r e d with s t o r e d m e m o r i e s in o r d e r to synthesize t h e

activation into s o m e f o r m o f d r e a m c o n t e n t . I n o t h e r words, H o b s o n a n d Mc-

Carley claim that what is r e f e r r e d to as R E M sleep actually causes d r e a m i n g ,

instead o f t h e opposing p o p u l a r view that d r e a m s p r o d u c e R E M sleep.

M E T H O D

In their article, H o b s o n a n d McCarley i n c o r p o r a t e d two m e t h o d s of r e s e a r c h .

O n e m e t h o d was to study a n d review previous work by m a n y r e s e a r c h e r s in t h e

a r e a of sleep a n d d r e a m i n g . In this single article, t h e a u t h o r s cite 37 r e f e r e n c e s

that pertain to their hypothesis, including several earlier studies of their own.

T h e s e c o n d m e t h o d they used was r e s e a r c h on t h e sleep a n d d r e a m i n g pat-

terns of animals. T h e y did n o t try to claim that n o n h u m a n animals d r e a m , be-

cause this is s o m e t h i n g no o n e c a n know for sure. (You may believe y o u r pet

d r e a m s , but has your dog or c a t ever told you what t h e d r e a m was a b o u t ? ) How-

ever, all m a m m a l s e x p e r i e n c e stages of sleep similar to those in h u m a n s . H o b -

son a n d McCarley went o n e step f u r t h e r a n d claimed that no significant

difference can be found between h u m a n s a n d o t h e r animals in t h e physiology

of d r e a m i n g sleep. So they c h o s e cats for their e x p e r i m e n t a l participants.

Using various l a b o r a t o r y techniques, they were able to stimulate or inhibit cer-

tain parts of t h e animals' brains a n d r e c o r d the effect on d r e a m i n g sleep.

R E S U L T S A N D D I S C U S S I O N

T h e various findings detailed by H o b s o n a n d McCarley were used to d e m o n -

strate different aspects of their theory. T h e r e f o r e , their results will be c o m b i n e d

with their discussion of the findings h e r e . T h e evidence g e n e r a t e d by t h e re-

searchers in support of their t h e o r y c a n be summarized in t h e following points:

1. T h e p a r t of t h e brain in t h e brain stem that c o n t r o l s physical m o v e m e n t

a n d i n c o m i n g i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m t h e senses is at least as active d u r i n g

d r e a m i n g sleep (which they called t h e D state) as it is when you a r e

52 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

awake. However, while you a r e asleep, sensory input ( i n f o r m a t i o n c o m -

ing i n t o y o u r brain f r o m t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a r o u n d y o u ) a n d m o t o r out-

p u t (voluntary m o v e m e n t o f y o u r body) a r e blocked. H o b s o n a n d

M c C a r l e y suggest that these physiological processes, r a t h e r than a psy-

c h o l o g i c a l censor, may be responsible for p r o t e c t i n g sleep.

You will r e m e m b e r f r o m t h e p r e c e d i n g reading, ' T o Sleep, No

D o u b t t o D r e a m , " that y o u a r e paralyzed d u r i n g R E M d r e a m i n g , p r e -

sumably t o p r o t e c t you f r o m t h e potential d a n g e r o f acting o u t y o u r

d r e a m s . H o b s o n a n d M c C a r l e y r e p o r t e d that this immobilization a c t u -

ally o c c u r s at t h e spinal c o r d a n d n o t in t h e brain itself. T h e r e f o r e , t h e

brain is quite c a p a b l e of sending m o t o r signals, but the body is n o t able

t o e x p r e s s t h e m . T h e a u t h o r s suggested t h a t this may a c c o u n t for the

s t r a n g e p a t t e r n s of m o v e m e n t in d r e a m s , such as y o u r inability to r u n

f r o m d a n g e r o r t h e p e r c e p t i o n t h a t you a r e moving i n slow m o t i o n .

2. T h e m a i n e x c e p t i o n to this blocking of m o t o r responses is in the mus-

cles a n d n e r v e s c o n t r o l l i n g t h e eyes. In p a r t , this explains why rapid eye

m o v e m e n t o c c u r s d u r i n g D state, a n d it may also explain how visual im-

ages a r e t r i g g e r e d d u r i n g d r e a m i n g .

3 . H o b s o n a n d McCarley p o i n t e d o u t a n o t h e r aspect o f d r e a m i n g that

e m e r g e d f r o m a physiological analysis of the D state a n d that could not

be e x p l a i n e d by a psychoanalytic interpretation. This was that the brain

e n t e r s R E M sleep at r e g u l a r a n d predictable intervals during e a c h night's

sleep a n d r e m a i n s in that state for specific lengths of time. Nothing is

r a n d o m a b o u t this sleep cycle. T h e a u t h o r s i n t e r p r e t e d this to m e a n that

d r e a m i n g c a n n o t be a response to waking events or u n c o n s c i o u s wishes,

b e c a u s e this would p r o d u c e d r e a m i n g at any m o m e n t during sleep, a c -

c o r d i n g to t h e whims a n d n e e d s of the person's psyche. Instead, the D

state a p p e a r e d to H o b s o n a n d McCarley to be a p r e p r o g r a m m e d event in

t h e brain t h a t functions almost like a neurobiological clock.

4. T h e r e s e a r c h e r s p o i n t e d to findings by others that d e m o n s t r a t e d that all

m a m m a l s cycle t h r o u g h R E M a n d N R E M sleep. This sleep cycle varies ac-

c o r d i n g to t h e body size of t h e animal. A rat, for e x a m p l e , will shift be-

tween R E M a n d N R E M every 6 minutes, while for an e l e p h a n t a single

cycle takes two-and-a-half hours! O n e explanation for this difference may

be that t h e m o r e vulnerable an animal is to p r e d a t o r s , the shorter a r e its

periods of s o u n d sleep during which it is less alert a n d thus in g r e a t e r dan-

g e r of attack. W h a t e v e r the reason, H o b s o n a n d McCarley took these find-

ings as additional evidence that d r e a m i n g sleep is purely physiological.

5. H o b s o n a n d McCarley claimed to have found the trigger, the power supply,

a n d the clock of t h e "dream state generator" in the brain. They r e p o r t e d

this to be the pontine brain stem, located in the back a n d n e a r the base of

the brain. Measurements of neural activity (i.e., the brain-chemical activity

of neurotransmitters a n d t h e frequency of the firing of neurons) in this

part of the brain in cats revealed significant peaks in activity c o r r e s p o n d i n g

Reading 7 Unromancing the Dream 53

to periods of R E M sleep. W h e n this p a r t of the brain was artificially inhib-

ited, the animals went for weeks without any R E M sleep. F u r t h e r m o r e , re-

ducing the activity of the pontine caused the length of time between

periods of D state sleep to increase. Conversely, stimulation of the brain

stem caused R E M sleep to o c c u r earlier a n d increased t h e length of R E M

periods. Such increases in R E M have been a t t e m p t e d through conscious

behavioral techniques, but these have been mostly unsuccessful. T h e au-

thors' interpretation of these findings was that because a part of t h e brain

completely separate from the pontine brain stem is involved in conscious-

ness, dreaming c a n n o t be driven by psychological forces.

T h e f i r s t f i v e points s u m m a r i z e d f r o m H o b s o n a n d McCarley's r e s e a r c h

focused on t h e activation p o r t i o n of their theory. T h e y m a i n t a i n e d that

the synthesis of this activation is what p r o d u c e s your e x p e r i e n c e of d r e a m -

ing. T h e psychological implications of t h e i r t h e o r y w e r e detailed by t h e

a u t h o r s in four basic tenets:

a. ' T h e p r i m a r y motivating f o r c e for d r e a m i n g is n o t psychological

but physiological, since t h e time o f o c c u r r e n c e a n d d u r a t i o n o f

d r e a m i n g sleep a r e quite c o n s t a n t , suggesting a p r e p r o g r a m m e d ,

neurally d e t e r m i n e d genesis" (p. 1 3 4 6 ) . T h e y did allow that d r e a m s

may have psychological m e a n i n g , but they suggested t h a t this m e a n -

ing is m u c h m o r e basic t h a n t h e psychoanalytic view imagines it to

b e . T h e y f u r t h e r c o n t e n d e d t h a t d r e a m i n g should n o l o n g e r b e

c o n s i d e r e d to have purely psychological significance.

b. During d r e a m i n g , t h e brain stem is n o t r e s p o n d i n g to sensory input

o r p r o d u c i n g m o t o r o u t p u t based o n t h e world a r o u n d you; instead

it is activating itself internally B e c a u s e this activation originates in a

relatively primitive p a r t of t h e brain, it d o e s n o t c o n t a i n any ideas,

e m o t i o n s , stories, fears, or wishes. It is simple e l e c t r i c a l - c h e m i c a l

transmissions. A s t h e activation r e a c h e s t h e m o r e a d v a n c e d , c o g n i -

tive s t r u c t u r e s of t h e brain, you try to m a k e sense o u t of it. "In o t h e r

words, the forebrain may be making t h e best of a b a d j o b in p r o -

d u c i n g even partially c o h e r e n t d r e a m i m a g e r y f r o m t h e relatively

noisy signals sent up to it f r o m t h e brain stem" ( p . 1 3 4 7 ) .

c. T h e r e f o r e , this e l a b o r a t i o n of r a n d o m signals into d r e a m s is inter-

p r e t e d to be a c o n s t r u c t i v e p r o c e s s — a synthesis—instead of a dis-

t o r t i o n p r o c e s s by which u n a c c e p t a b l e wishes a r e h i d d e n f r o m y o u r

consciousness. I m a g e s a r e called u p f r o m y o u r m e m o r y i n a n at-

t e m p t to m a t c h t h e d a t a g e n e r a t e d by t h e brain stem's activation. It

is precisely b e c a u s e of t h e r a n d o m n e s s of t h e impulses, a n d t h e dif-

ficult task of t h e brain to try to inject t h e m with s o m e m e a n i n g , that

d r e a m s a r e often b i z a r r e , disjointed, a n d seemingly mysterious.

d . F r e u d ' s e x p l a n a t i o n for o u r forgetting d r e a m s was repression. H e

believed that when t h e c o n t e n t of a d r e a m is t o o disturbing for

s o m e r e a s o n , you a r e motivated to forget it. H o b s o n a n d McCarley,

54 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

FIGURE 7-1 Psychoanalytic theory and activation-synthesis hypothesis compared. (Adapted from p. 1346)

acknowledging t h a t d r e a m recall is p o o r ( a t least 9 5 % of all d r e a m s

a r e n o t r e m e m b e r e d ) , offered a purely physiological e x p l a n a t i o n

t h a t was c o n c o r d a n t with t h e rest of t h e i r activation-synthesis hy-

pothesis. T h e y c l a i m e d t h a t w h e n w e awaken, t h e c h e m i s t r y o f t h e

brain u n d e r g o e s a n i m m e d i a t e c h a n g e . C e r t a i n brain c h e m i c a l s

n e c e s s a r y for c o n v e r t i n g s h o r t - t e r m m e m o r i e s into long-term o n e s

a r e suppressed d u r i n g R E M sleep. So unless a d r e a m is particularly

vivid ( m e a n i n g t h a t it is p r o d u c e d by a l a r g e a m o u n t of activation)

a n d you awaken d u r i n g o r immediately after it, t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e

d r e a m will n o t b e r e m e m b e r e d .

F i g u r e 7-1 illustrates H o b s o n a n d McCarley's c o m p a r i s o n between t h e

psychoanalytic view of t h e d r e a m p r o c e s s a n d their activation-synthesis m o d e l .

I M P L I C A T I O N S A N D R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

H o b s o n a n d M c C a r l e y have c o n t i n u e d t o c o n d u c t r e s e a r c h i n s u p p o r t o f their

r e v o l u t i o n a r y hypothesis o f d r e a m i n g . T h e i r new c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n has n o t

b e e n universally a c c e p t e d , b u t n o psychological discussion o f d r e a m i n g would

be c o n s i d e r e d c o m p l e t e without its inclusion.

Twelve years after t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f H o b s o n a n d McCarley's original ar-

ticle on t h e activation-synthesis m o d e l , Allan H o b s o n published his book

called, simply, Sleep. In this work, he explains his t h e o r y of d r e a m i n g in ex-

p a n d e d a n d g r e a d y simplified t e r m s . He also e l a b o r a t e s on his view a b o u t

what i m p a c t t h e t h e o r y may have o n t h e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f d r e a m c o n t e n t .

A n d , h e allows, d r e a m s a r e n o t devoid o f m e a n i n g , b u t should b e i n t e r p r e t e d

in m o r e straightforward ways. H o b s o n states his view as follows:

For all their nonsense, dreams have a clear import and a deeply personal one. Their meaning would stem, I assert, from the necessity in REM sleep for the

Reading 7 Unromancing the Dream 55

brain-mind to act upon its own information and according to its own lights. Thus, I would like to retain the emphasis of psychoanalysis upon the power of dreams to reveal deep aspects about ourselves, but without recourse to the con- cept of disguise and censorship or to the now famous Freudian symbols. My ten- dency, then, is to ascribe the nonsense to brain-mind dysfunction and the sense to its compensatory effort to create order out of chaos. That order is a function of our own personal view of the world, our current preoccupations, our remote memories, our feelings, and our beliefs. That's all. (Hobson, 1989, p. 166)

A n o t h e r d r e a m r e s e a r c h e r took H o b s o n ' s s e n t i m e n t s a step further.

Foulkes ( 1 9 8 5 ) , a leading r e s e a r c h e r on d a y d r e a m i n g , also subscribes to t h e

notion that night d r e a m s a r e g e n e r a t e d by s p o n t a n e o u s brain activity d u r i n g

sleep. H e has suggested that a l t h o u g h d r e a m s d o n o t c o n t a i n h i d d e n u n c o n -

scious messages, they may provide us with a g r e a t deal of psychological infor-

m a t i o n . Foulkes maintains that t h e way y o u r cognitive system places f o r m a n d

sense o n t o the r a n d o m impulses in y o u r brain reveals i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e

i m p o r t a n c e o f c e r t a i n o f y o u r m e m o r i e s a n d provides insight into y o u r think-

ing processes. He also believes that d r e a m s serve several useful p u r p o s e s . O n e

o f these arises f r o m d r e a m s you have a b o u t e x p e r i e n c e s t h a t have n o t actually

h a p p e n e d to you. T h e s e d r e a m s may assist in p r e p a r i n g you to e n c o u n t e r new

or u n e x p e c t e d e v e n t s — s o m e t h i n g like a cognitive r e h e a r s a l , or "What would I

d o i f . . . ?"

A n d t h e r e s e a r c h c o n t i n u e s . Many studies seek to c h a l l e n g e H o b s o n a n d

McCarley's c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f t h e origin a n d function o f d r e a m s . O n e such

study d e m o n s t r a t e d how t h e controversy a m o n g sleep a n d d r e a m theorists

lives on. Various individuals in t h e F r e u d i a n - b a s e d , psychoanalytic c o m m u n i t y

c o n t i n u e s t o e x p r e s s t h e i r a n n o y a n c e that H o b s o n a n d McCarley's t h e o r i e s

leave little r o o m for t h e F r e u d i a n view that d r e a m s a r e messages f r o m t h e un-

conscious. In a j o u r n a l d e v o t e d to F r e u d i a n psychoanalysis, M a n c i a ( 1 9 9 9 )

d e m o n s t r a t e s the differences between t h e psychoanalytic n o t i o n o f d r e a m i n g

a n d t h e t h e o r y p r o p o s e d by H o b s o n a n d McCarley, often r e f e r r e d to as t h e

"neuroscientific" a p p r o a c h . M a n c i a describes t h e clash between these two

f u n d a m e n t a l views with g r e a t clarity:

Whereas the neuroscientists are interested in the structures involved in dream production and in dream organization and narratability; psychoanalysis concen- trates on the meaning of dreams and on placing them in the context of the ana- lytic relationship [with the analyst] in accordance with the affective [emotional] history of the dreamer . . . . The brain structures and functions of interest to the neurosciences . . . are irrelevant to their psychoanalytic understanding, (p. 1205)

Of c o u r s e , H o b s o n a n d McCarley very likely would reply t h a t no "psy-

choanalytic u n d e r s t a n d i n g " is possible b e c a u s e no u n c o n s c i o u s exists, at least

in the F r e u d i a n c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of it. T h a t d e b a t e , a l t h o u g h well worth hav-

ing, must be saved for a n o t h e r time a n d p l a c e .

A fascinating study citing Hobson a n d McCarley's study shed s o m e inter-

esting new light on sleep a n d dreaming. In an article entitled "AJekyll a n d Hyde

Within," researchers e x a m i n e d h u n d r e d s o f reports about d r e a m s that o c c u r r e d

during R E M sleep as well as d r e a m s that a p p e a r e d to o c c u r during the early

56 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

Reading 8: ACTING AS IF YOU ARE HYPNOTIZED Spanos, N. P. (1982). Hypnotic behavior: A cognitive, social, psychological perspec-

tive. Research Communications in Psychology, Psychiatry, and Behavior, 7,

199-213.

T h e alterations in consciousness with which we a r e all m o s t familiar a r e r e -

lated to sleep a n d d r e a m i n g . T h e two previous r e a d i n g s have focused on

highly influential studies relating to these topics. A n o t h e r p h e n o m e n o n relat-

ing to a l t e r e d states of consciousness is hypnosis. Most p e o p l e see hypnosis as

a mysterious a n d powerful p r o c e s s of c o n t r o l l i n g a t h e m i n d . T h e phrases a n d

words t h a t s u r r o u n d hypnosis, such as going under a n d trance, indicate t h a t it is

c o m m o n l y c o n s i d e r e d to be a s e p a r a t e a n d u n i q u e state of awareness, differ-

e n t f r o m b o t h waking a n d sleep. A n d m a n y psychologists s u p p o r t this view to

varying d e g r e e s . Nicholas S p a n o s ( 1 9 4 2 - 1 9 9 4 ) , however, led an opposing view

t h a t hypnosis is, in reality, n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n an i n c r e a s e d d e g r e e of motiva-

t i o n t o p e r f o r m c e r t a i n behaviors a n d c a n b e e x p l a i n e d fully without invoking

n o t i o n s o f t r a n c e s o r a l t e r e d states.

T h e beginnings of hypnosis a r e usually t r a c e d back to the middle of the

18th century, a time when m e n t a l illness was first recognized by some as stem-

ming from psychological r a t h e r than o r g a n i c causes. O n e of t h e many influential

stages o f N R E M sleep ( M c N a m a r a , e t al., 2 0 0 5 ) . T h e researchers focused their

analysis of t h e d r e a m s on social interactions that o c c u r r e d in the d r e a m reports.

T h e y t h e n c o m p a r e d aggressive versus friendly d r e a m social interactions a n d

found s o m e surprising results. Twice as many aggressive interactions o c c u r r e d in

R E M sleep d r e a m r e p o r t s c o m p a r e d to N R E M reports (an interesting side n o t e

was that n o n e of the d r e a m reports included sexually related interactions).

C O N C L U S I O N

W h e t h e r or n o t you a r e willing to a c c e p t the r a t h e r less r o m a n t i c view of d r e a m -

ing developed by H o b s o n a n d McCarley's r e s e a r c h , this is an e x c e l l e n t e x a m p l e

of how psychologists or scientists in any field n e e d to r e m a i n o p e n to new possi-

bilities even when the established o r d e r has existed for decades. W i t h o u t a

doubt, the activation-synthesis m o d e l of d r e a m s has c h a n g e d psychology. This

d o e s n o t m e a n that we have solved all t h e mysteries of sleep a n d dreaming, a n d

p e r h a p s we never will. B u t it's b o u n d to be a fascinating journey.

Foulkes, D. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Dreaming: A cognitive-psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hobson, J. A. ( 1 9 8 9 ) . Sleep. New York: Scientific American Library. Mancia, M. ( 1 9 9 9 ) . Psychoanalysis and the neurosciences: A topical debate on dreams. Interna-

tional Journal of Psychoanalysis, 8 0 ( 6 ) , 1 2 0 5 - 1 2 1 3 . McNamara, P., McLaren, D., & Smith, D., et al. ( 2 0 0 5 ) . A "Jekyll and Hyde" within: Aggressive

versus friendly interactions in REM and non-REM dreams. Psychological Science, 1 6 ( 2 ) , 1 3 0 - 1 3 6 .

Reading 8 Acting as If You Are Hypnotized 57

individuals who helped bring psychology out of the realm of witchcraft a n d devil

possession was Franz Anton M e s m e r ( 1 7 3 3 - 1 8 1 5 ) . He believed that "hysterical

disorders" were a result of imbalances in a "universal m a g n e t i c fluid" present in

the h u m a n body. During strange gatherings in his laboratory, soft music would

play, the lights would dim, a n d Mesmer, c o s t u m e d like D u m b l e d o r e , would take

iron rods from bottles of various chemicals a n d touch parts of afflicted patients'

bodies. He believed that these elements a n d chemicals would transmit what he

called the "animal magnetism" into the patients a n d provide relief from their

symptoms. Interestingly, history has r e c o r d e d that in many cases this t r e a t m e n t

appears to be successful (probably due to placebo effects). It is from M e s m e r that

we acquired the word mesmerize, a n d many believe that his t r e a t m e n t included

some of the techniques we now associate with hypnosis.

T h r o u g h o u t t h e history of psychology, hypnosis ( n a m e d after Hypnos,

the G r e e k g o d of sleep) has played a p r o m i n e n t r o l e , especially in t h e treat-

m e n t of psychological disorders, a n d it was a m a j o r c o m p o n e n t in F r e u d ' s psy-

choanalytic t e c h n i q u e s . E r n e s t Hilgard ( 1 9 0 4 - 2 0 0 1 ) was a t t h e f o r e f r o n t o f

m o d e r n r e s e a r c h e r s who s u p p o r t t h e position t h a t hypnosis is an a l t e r e d psy-

chological state (see Hilgard, 1 9 7 8 ; Kihlstrom, 1 9 9 8 ) . His a n d o t h e r s ' descrip-

tions of hypnosis have included c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as i n c r e a s e d susceptibility

to suggestion, involuntary p e r f o r m a n c e of behaviors, i m p r o v e m e n t s in recall,

i n c r e a s e d intensity of visual imagination, dissociation ( t h e psychological sepa-

ration from a person's c u r r e n t e n v i r o n m e n t a l reality), a n d analgesia (lowered

sensitivity to p a i n ) . Until t h e 1 9 7 0 s , t h e i d e a that hypnosis is c a p a b l e of p r o -

ducing t h o u g h t s , ideas, a n d behaviors that would otherwise be impossible,

a n d that it is an a l t e r e d state of consciousness, has b e e n virtually undisputed.

However, it is t h e j o b of scientists to look u p o n t h e status q u o with a crit-

ical eye a n d , whenever they see fit, to a t t e m p t to d e b u n k c o m m o n beliefs. J u s t

as H o b s o n a n d McCarley p r o p o s e d a new view of d r e a m i n g t h a t was radically

different f r o m t h e prevailing a n d p o p u l a r o n e , social psychologist Nicholas

Spanos suggested that t h e m a j o r assumptions underlying hypnosis, as set f o r t h

by Hilgard a n d o t h e r s , should be q u e s t i o n e d . In this article S p a n o s w r o t e ,

' T h e positing of special processes to a c c o u n t for hypnotic behavior is n o t only

unnecessary, but also misleading . . . . H y p n o t i c behavior i s basically similar t o

o t h e r social behavior a n d , like o t h e r social behavior, c a n be usefully d e s c r i b e d

a s strategic a n d goal-directed" ( p . 2 0 0 ) . I n o t h e r words, S p a n o s c o n t e n d e d

that hypnotized participants a r e actually e n g a g i n g in voluntary behavior de-

signed to p r o d u c e a desired c o n s e q u e n c e . He f u r t h e r m a i n t a i n e d t h a t al-

t h o u g h such behavior may result f r o m i n c r e a s e d motivation, it d o e s not

involve an altered state of consciousness.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

Spanos theorized that all the behaviors c o m m o n l y attributed to a hypnotic

t r a n c e state a r e within the n o r m a l , voluntary abilities of h u m a n s . He main-

tained that the only reason people define themselves as having b e e n hypnotized

58 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

is t h a t they have i n t e r p r e t e d t h e i r own behavior u n d e r hypnosis in ways t h a t

a r e c o n s i s t e n t with t h e i r expectations a b o u t being hypnotized. S p a n o s viewed

t h e p r o c e s s of hypnosis as a ritual that in W e s t e r n c u l t u r e s c a r r i e s a g r e a t d e a l

o f m e a n i n g . P a r t i c i p a n t s e x p e c t t o relinquish c o n t r o l over t h e i r own behav-

ior, a n d as t h e p r o c e s s of h y p n o t i c i n d u c t i o n develops, they begin to believe

t h a t t h e i r v o l u n t a r y acts a r e b e c o m i n g a u t o m a t i c , involuntary events. A n e x -

a m p l e of this t h a t S p a n o s offered is that v o l u n t a r y i n s t r u c t i o n s a r e given

early in t h e h y p n o t i c p r o c e d u r e to t h e p a r t i c i p a n t , such as "Relax t h e mus-

cles in y o u r legs," b u t l a t e r these b e c o m e involuntary suggestions, s u c h as

"Your legs feel limp a n d heavy."

In c o l l a b o r a t i o n with various colleagues a n d associates, Spanos d e v o t e d

nearly a d e c a d e of r e s e a r c h p r i o r to this 1 9 8 2 article, d e m o n s t r a t i n g how

m a n y o f t h e effects c o m m o n l y attributed t o hypnotic t r a n c e s c o u l d b e ex-

plained j u s t as readily ( o r even m o r e simply) in less mysterious ways.

M E T H O D

T h i s a r t i c l e d o e s n o t r e p o r t o n o n e specific e x p e r i m e n t b u t r a t h e r s u m m a -

rizes a g r o u p of studies c o n d u c t e d by S p a n o s a n d his associates p r i o r to

1 9 8 2 , which w e r e d e s i g n e d t o s u p p o r t his position c o u n t e r i n g Hilgard's c o n -

t e n t i o n ( a n d t h e p o p u l a r belief) t h a t hypnosis is a u n i q u e state of c o n -

sciousness. Most o f t h e findings r e p o r t e d w e r e taken f r o m 1 6 studies i n

which S p a n o s was d i r e c t l y involved a n d t h a t o f f e r e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f hyp-

notically p r o d u c e d b e h a v i o r o t h e r t h a n t h e c o m m o n a s s u m p t i o n o f a

u n i q u e a l t e r e d state o f b e i n g .

R E S U L T S A N D D I S C U S S I O N

Spanos c l a i m e d that two key aspects of hypnosis lead p e o p l e to perceive it as an

altered state of consciousness. O n e is t h a t participants i n t e r p r e t their behavior

during hypnosis as c a u s e d by s o m e t h i n g o t h e r than t h e self, thus making their

actions seem involuntary. T h e s e c o n d aspect is t h e belief discussed previously

that t h e "hypnosis ritual" c r e a t e s e x p e c t a t i o n s in participants, which in turn

motivate t h e m to behave in ways that a r e consistent with their e x p e c t a t i o n s .

T h e findings of t h e r e s e a r c h Spanos r e p o r t s in this article focus on how these

frequendy cited claims a b o u t hypnosis may be drawn i n t o question.

T h e Belief That Behavior Is Involuntary

As participants a r e being hypnotized, they a r e usually asked to take various

tests to d e t e r m i n e if a h y p n o t i c state has b e e n i n d u c e d . S p a n o s c l a i m e d that

these tests a r e often c a r r i e d o u t in such a way as to invite t h e participants to

c o n v i n c e themselves t h a t s o m e t h i n g o u t of t h e o r d i n a r y is h a p p e n i n g . Hyp-

n o t i c tests involve suggestions, such as "Your a r m is heavy a n d you c a n n o t h o l d

it up"; ' Y o u r h a n d s a r e being drawn t o g e t h e r by s o m e f o r c e a n d you c a n n o t

k e e p t h e m apart"; "Your a r m is as rigid as a steel b a r a n d you c a n n o t b e n d it;

or "Your body is so heavy t h a t you c a n n o t stand up." Spanos i n t e r p r e t e d these

Reading 8 Acting as If You Are Hypnotized 59

test suggestions as c o n t a i n i n g two i n t e r r e l a t e d requests. O n e r e q u e s t asks p a r -

ticipants t o d o s o m e t h i n g , a n d t h e o t h e r asks t h e m t o i n t e r p r e t t h e a c t i o n a s

having o c c u r r e d involuntarily. S o m e participants fail c o m p l e t e l y to r e s p o n d to

the suggestion. Spanos c l a i m e d that these p a r t i c i p a n t s d o n o t u n d e r s t a n d t h a t

they must voluntarily do s o m e t h i n g to initiate t h e suggested b e h a v i o r a n d in-

stead simply wait for their a r m s or body to begin to move. O t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t s

r e s p o n d to t h e suggestion b u t a r e aware that they a r e behaving voluntarily.

Still o t h e r participants a g r e e to b o t h requests; they r e s p o n d to t h e suggestion

a n d i n t e r p r e t t h e i r r e s p o n s e a s b e y o n d t h e i r c o n t r o l .

Spanos suggested t h a t w h e t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t e r p r e t t h e i r b e h a v i o r t o

be v o l u n t a r y or involuntary d e p e n d s on t h e way t h e suggestion is w o r d e d . In

o n e of his studies, S p a n o s p u t two g r o u p s of p a r t i c i p a n t s t h r o u g h a hypnosis

i n d u c t i o n p r o c e d u r e . T h e n t o o n e g r o u p h e m a d e various b e h a v i o r sugges-

tions, such as "Your a r m is very light a n d is rising." To t h e o t h e r g r o u p he

gave d i r e c t instructions for t h e s a m e behaviors, such as "Raise y o u r a r m . " Af-

t e r w a r d he asked t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s if they t h o u g h t t h e i r b e h a v i o r s w e r e volun-

t a r y o r involuntary. T h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e suggestion g r o u p w e r e m o r e

likely to i n t e r p r e t t h e i r behaviors as i n v o l u n t a r y t h a n w e r e t h o s e in t h e d i r e c t

instruction g r o u p .

Right now, while you a r e r e a d i n g this p a g e , h o l d y o u r left a r m straight

o u t a n d keep it t h e r e for a c o u p l e of minutes. You will n o t i c e t h a t it begins to

feel heavy. This heaviness is n o t d u e to hypnosis; it's d u e to gravity! So if y o u

a r e hypnotized a n d given t h e suggestion t h a t y o u r o u t s t r e t c h e d a r m is b e c o m -

ing heavy, it would be very easy for you to attribute y o u r a c t i o n of lowering

your a r m to involuntary forces (you want to lower it anyway!). B u t what if you

a r e given t h e suggestion that y o u r a r m is light a n d rising? If you raise y o u r

a r m , it should be m o r e difficult to i n t e r p r e t that a c t i o n as involuntary, be-

cause you would have to i g n o r e t h e c o n t r a d i c t o r y feedback provided by grav-

ity. Spanos tested this idea a n d found t h a t s u c h an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was m o r e

difficult. Participants w h o believed they were hypnotized were significantly

m o r e likely to define as involuntary their behavior of a r m lowering t h a n t h a t

of a r m raising. In t h e traditional view of hypnosis, t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e a r m in

the hypnotic suggestion should n o t m a k e any difference; it should always be

c o n s i d e r e d involuntary.

Suggestions m a d e to hypnotic participants often ask t h e m to i m a g i n e

c e r t a i n situations in o r d e r to p r o d u c e a desired behavior. If you w e r e a p a r t i c -

ipant, you m i g h t be given t h e suggestion t h a t y o u r a r m is rigid a n d you c a n n o t

b e n d it. To r e i n f o r c e this suggestion, it m i g h t be a d d e d t h a t y o u r a r m is in a

plaster cast. Spanos believed that s o m e p e o p l e may b e c o m e a b s o r b e d in these

imaginai strategies m o r e t h a n o t h e r s , which c o u l d have t h e effect o f leading

t h e m to believe that t h e i r r e s p o n s e ( t h e inability to move t h e i r a r m ) was in-

voluntary. His r e a s o n i n g was t h a t if you a r e highly a b s o r b e d , you will n o t be

able to focus on i n f o r m a t i o n that alerts you to t h e fact t h a t t h e fantasy is n o t

real. T h e m o r e vividly you i m a g i n e t h e cast, its t e x t u r e a n d h a r d n e s s , how it

g o t t h e r e , a n d so o n , t h e less likely you a r e to r e m e m b e r that this is only y o u r

60 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

i m a g i n a t i o n at work. If this d e e p a b s o r p t i o n h a p p e n s , you m i g h t be m o r e in-

c l i n e d to believe t h a t y o u r rigid-arm b e h a v i o r was involuntary when actually it

was not. In s u p p o r t of this, Spanos f o u n d that when participants were asked to

r a t e how a b s o r b e d they were in a suggested i m a g i n e d s c e n a r i o , t h e h i g h e r t h e

a b s o r p t i o n rating, t h e m o r e likely they w e r e to i n t e r p r e t their r e l a t e d behav-

i o r as o c c u r r i n g involuntarily. S p a n o s also n o t e d that a person's susceptibility

to hypnosis c o r r e l a t e s with his or h e r g e n e r a l t e n d e n c y to b e c o m e a b s o r b e d in

o t h e r activities, such as books, music, or d a y d r e a m i n g . Consequently, these in-

dividuals a r e m o r e likely to willingly c o o p e r a t e with t h e kind of suggestions in-

volved in hypnosis.

C r e a t i o n of Expectations in H y p n o t i c Participants

Spanos c l a i m e d that t h e beliefs m o s t p e o p l e have a b o u t hypnosis a r e a d e q u a t e

in themselves to p r o d u c e what is typically seen as hypnotic behavior. He further

c o n t e n d e d that these beliefs a r e s t r e n g t h e n e d by t h e m e t h o d s used to i n d u c e

a n d study hypnosis. H e cited t h r e e e x a m p l e s o f r e s e a r c h that d e m o n s t r a t e d

how p e o p l e m i g h t e n g a g e in c e r t a i n behaviors u n d e r hypnosis b e c a u s e they

think they should, r a t h e r than b e c a u s e of an altered state of awareness.

F i r s t , S p a n o s r e f e r r e d to a study in w h i c h a l e c t u r e a b o u t hypnosis

was given t o two g r o u p s o f s t u d e n t s . T h e l e c t u r e s w e r e i d e n t i c a l e x c e p t

t h a t o n e g r o u p was t o l d t h a t a r m rigidity was a s p o n t a n e o u s e v e n t d u r i n g

hypnosis. L a t e r b o t h g r o u p s w e r e h y p n o t i z e d . I n t h e g r o u p t h a t h a d h e a r d

t h e l e c t u r e i n c l u d i n g t h e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t a r m rigidity, s o m e o f t h e p a r -

t i c i p a n t s e x h i b i t e d this b e h a v i o r spontaneously, w i t h o u t any i n s t r u c t i o n s to

d o so. H o w e v e r , a m o n g t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e o t h e r g r o u p , n o t o n e a r m

b e c a m e r i g i d . A c c o r d i n g t o S p a n o s , this d e m o n s t r a t e d h o w p e o p l e will

e n a c t t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e o f h y p n o s i s a c c o r d i n g t o h o w they believe they a r e

s u p p o s e d t o b e h a v e .

T h e s e c o n d h y p n o t i c event t h a t S p a n o s u s e d t o illustrate his position

involved r e s e a r c h findings t h a t h y p n o t i z e d p a r t i c i p a n t s c l a i m t h e visual im-

a g e r y they e x p e r i e n c e d u n d e r hypnosis was m o r e i n t e n s e , vivid, a n d r e a l

t h a n similar i m a g i n i n g s w h e n n o t h y p n o t i z e d . H e r e , in e s s e n c e , is how these

studies typically h a v e b e e n d o n e : P a r t i c i p a n t s a r e asked t o i m a g i n e s c e n e s o r

situations i n w h i c h they a r e p e r f o r m i n g c e r t a i n b e h a v i o r s . T h e n , these s a m e

p a r t i c i p a n t s a r e h y p n o t i z e d a n d again a s k e d t o visualize t h e s a m e o r similar

situations ( t h e h y p n o t i z e d a n d n o n h y p n o t i z e d trials c a n b e i n any o r d e r ) .

T h e s e p a r t i c i p a n t s g e n e r a l l y r e p o r t t h a t t h e i m a g e r y i n t h e hypnotized c o n -

dition was significantly m o r e i n t e n s e . S p a n o s a n d his associates f o u n d , how-

ever, t h a t w h e n two different g r o u p s o f p a r t i c i p a n t s a r e used, o n e hypnotized

a n d o n e n o t , t h e i r a v e r a g e intensity r a t i n g s o f t h e visual i m a g e r y a r e ap-

p r o x i m a t e l y equal. T h e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e two m e t h o d s i s p r o b a b l y e x p l a i n e d

b y t h e fact t h a t w h e n two d i f f e r e n t g r o u p s a r e tested, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s d o n o t

have a n y t h i n g t o use for c o m p a r i s o n . However, w h e n t h e s a m e p a r t i c i p a n t s

a r e u s e d i n b o t h c o n d i t i o n s , they c a n c o m p a r e t h e two e x p e r i e n c e s a n d r a t e

o n e against t h e o t h e r . B e c a u s e p a r t i c i p a n t s n e a r l y always r a t e t h e h y p n o t i c

Reading 8 Acting as If You Are Hypnotized 61

i m a g e r y as m o r e i n t e n s e , this s u p p o r t s t h e i d e a t h a t hypnosis is really an al-

t e r e d state, r i g h t ? If y o u c o u l d ask S p a n o s , he w o u l d say, "Wrong!" In his

view, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s w h o p a r t i c i p a t e i n b o t h c o n d i t i o n s e x p e c t t h e r i t u a l

o f hypnosis t o p r o d u c e m o r e i n t e n s e i m a g e r y , a n d , t h e r e f o r e , they r a t e i t

a c c o r d i n g l y .

T h e third a n d p e r h a p s m o s t interesting d e m o n s t r a t i o n o f hypnosis ad-

dressed by Spanos was the claim that hypnosis can cause p e o p l e to b e c o m e in-

sensitive to pain ( t h e analgesia effect). O n e way that pain c a n be tested in t h e

laboratory without causing d a m a g e to the participant is by using the "cold pres-

sor test." If you a r e a participant in such a study, you would be asked to im-

m e r s e your a r m in ice water (0 d e g r e e s c e n t i g r a d e ) a n d leave it t h e r e as long as

you could. After t h e first 10 s e c o n d s or so, this b e c o m e s increasingly painful,

and most people will r e m o v e their a r m within a m i n u t e or two. Hilgard ( 1 9 7 8 )

r e p o r t e d that participants who received both waking a n d hypnotic training in

analgesia (pain r e d u c t i o n ) r e p o r t e d significantly less cold-pressor pain d u r i n g

the hypnotized trials. His e x p l a n a t i o n for this was that during hypnosis, a per-

son is able to dissociate t h e pain f r o m awareness. In this way, Hilgard c o n -

t e n d e d , a p a r t of t h e person's consciousness e x p e r i e n c e s t h e pain, but this p a r t

is hidden from awareness by what he called an "amnesic barrier."

Again, Spanos r e j e c t e d a hypnotic e x p l a n a t i o n for these analgesic find-

ings a n d offered e v i d e n c e to d e m o n s t r a t e that r e d u c t i o n in p e r c e i v e d pain

during hypnosis is a result of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' motivation a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s .

All t h e r e s e a r c h on hypnosis uses participants who have s c o r e d high on m e a -

sures of hypnotic susceptibility. A c c o r d i n g to Spanos, these individuals "have a

strong investment in p r e s e n t i n g themselves in t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l setting as

g o o d hypnotic subjects" (p. 2 0 8 ) . T h e participants know that a waking state is

being c o m p a r e d to a hypnotic state a n d want to d e m o n s t r a t e t h e effectiveness

of hypnosis. Spanos, working with his associate H . J . S t a m , p e r f o r m e d a simi-

lar study involving cold-pressor pain b u t with o n e m a j o r difference: s o m e p a r -

ticipants were told that they would first use waking analgesia t e c h n i q u e s ( s u c h

as self-distraction) a n d would t h e n be tested using hypnotic p a i n - r e d u c t i o n

m e t h o d s , but o t h e r participants were n o t told o f t h e l a t e r hypnotic test (see

also Stam a n d Spanos, 1 9 8 0 ) .

F i g u r e 8-1 summarizes what Stam a n d S p a n o s found. W h e n p a r t i c i p a n t s

e x p e c t e d t h e hypnosis c o n d i t i o n to follow t h e waking trials, they r a t e d t h e

analgesic effect lower in o r d e r to, as the a u t h o r s state, "leave r o o m " for im-

p r o v e m e n t u n d e r hypnosis. Stam a n d Spanos c l a i m e d that this d e m o n s t r a t e d

how even the hypnotic behavior of pain insensitivity c o u l d be a t t r i b u t e d to t h e

participants' n e e d t o r e s p o n d t o t h e d e m a n d s o f t h e situation r a t h e r t h a n au-

tomatically assuming a dissociated state of consciousness.

T h e most i m p o r t a n t question c o n c e r n i n g all these findings r e p o r t e d by

Spanos is w h e t h e r we should reevaluate t h e p h e n o m e n o n called hypnosis.

A n d what does it m e a n if we w e r e to d e c i d e that hypnosis is n o t t h e powerful

mind-altering f o r c e that p o p u l a r c u l t u r e , a n d m a n y psychologists, have p o r -

trayed it to be?

62 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

Waking Hypnotic

Expectation of hypnosis

Waking Hypnotic

No expectation of hypnosis

FIGURE 8-1 Waking versus hypnotic analgesia: expecta- tion versus no expectation.

I M P L I C A T I O N S O F T H E F I N D I N G S

In evaluating Spanos's r e s e a r c h , you should r e m e m b e r that his goal was n o t to

prove t h a t hypnosis d o e s n o t exist but, r a t h e r , to d e m o n s t r a t e that what we

call hypnotic behaviors a r e t h e result of highly motivated, goal-directed social

behavior, n o t an a l t e r e d a n d u n i q u e state of consciousness. It is well a c c e p t e d

a m o n g m o s t behavioral scientists t h a t p e o p l e c a n n o t b e hypnotized against

t h e i r will. F u r t h e r m o r e , u n d e r hypnosis, participants will n o t e n g a g e in acts

they believe a r e antisocial, a n d they a r e n o t able t o p e r f o r m feats o f superhu-

m a n s t r e n g t h o r e n d u r a n c e . I n this article, Spanos has d e m o n s t r a t e d how

m a n y o f t h e m o r e s u b d e aspects o f hypnosis may b e e x p l a i n e d i n less mysteri-

ous a n d m o r e straightforward ways than that o f t h e hypnotic t r a n c e .

W h a t would b e t h e implications o f a c c e p t i n g Spanos's c o n t e n t i o n that

hypnosis d o e s n o t exist? T h e answer to this question is "Perhaps n o n e . "

W h e t h e r t h e effects o f hypnosis a r e p r o d u c e d b y a n a l t e r e d state o f awareness

or by i n c r e a s e d motivation d o e s n o t c h a n g e t h e fact t h a t hypnosis is often a

useful m e t h o d of helping p e o p l e i m p r o v e s o m e t h i n g in t h e i r lives. O n e r e a -

son t h a t t h e r e c o n t i n u e s t o b e s u c h widespread a n d unquestioning a c c e p -

t a n c e o f t h e p o w e r o f t h e h y p n o t i c t r a n c e may b e that h u m a n s n e e d t o feel

Reading 8 Acting as If You Are Hypnotized 63

that t h e r e is a way out, a last r e s o r t to solve t h e i r p r o b l e m s if all else fails—

s o m e t h i n g so o m n i p o t e n t t h a t they c a n even c h a n g e against their own resis-

t a n c e t o such c h a n g e .

W h e t h e r or n o t hypnosis is an a l t e r e d state of consciousness r e m a i n s a

highly controversial issue. B u t whatever hypnosis is, it is n o t t h e p a n a c e a m o s t

p e o p l e would like to find. Several studies have shown t h a t hypnosis is no m o r e

effective than o t h e r m e t h o d s o f t r e a t m e n t t o h e l p p e o p l e stop abusing alco-

hol a n d t o b a c c o , i m p r o v e their m e m o r y , o r lose weight (see L a z a r & D e m p -

ster, 1 9 8 1 , for a review of this r e s e a r c h ) .

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

A citation of Spanos's 1 9 8 2 article a p p e a r e d in a 1 9 9 7 article offering a new

t h e o r y to explain t h e idea that participants p e r f o r m behaviors involuntarily

u n d e r hypnosis ( L y n n , 1 9 9 7 ) . This r e s e a r c h e r c o n t e n d e d t h a t highly hypnoti-

zable individuals perceive t h e i r behaviors while "under" as involuntary for sev-

eral reasons. First, such p e o p l e e n t e r hypnosis with t h e intention to do what t h e

hypnotist suggests. S e c o n d , they strongly expect t h a t hypnosis has t h e p o w e r to

m o l d their behavior w h e t h e r they voluntarily c o o p e r a t e o r not. A n d third,

"the intention to c o o p e r a t e with t h e hypnotist, as well as t h e e x p e c t a t i o n to be

able to do so, c r e a t e a h e i g h t e n e d readiness to e x p e r i e n c e these a c t i o n s as in-

voluntary" ( p . 2 3 9 ) . It is n o t surprising that this r e s e a r c h e r relied on Spanos's

work in that the t h e o r y m i r r o r s a n d e n d o r s e s t h e ideas set f o r t h in t h e article

that is t h e subject of this r e a d i n g .

A n o t h e r study cited Spanos's perspectives on hypnosis to question certain

therapeutic practices often employed by s o m e psychotherapists to i n d u c e

clients to r e c o v e r ostensibly "repressed" m e m o r i e s of past sexual abuse (Lynn

et al., 2 0 0 3 ) . T h e a u t h o r s c o n t e n d e d that hypnosis, along with o t h e r t h e r a p e u -

tic techniques, may distort m e m o r i e s or even c r e a t e m e m o r i e s of abuse that

never actually took place, especially in early c h i l d h o o d (see the reading on t h e

work of Elizabeth Loftus in C h a p t e r IV for m o r e a b o u t r e c o v e r e d m e m o r i e s ) .

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s point out, based on Spanos's r e s e a r c h , that "Adults' m e m o r y

reports from 2 4 m o n t h s o f a g e o r earlier a r e likely t o r e p r e s e n t confabulations,

condensations, a n d constructions of early events, as well as c u r r e n t c o n c e r n s

a n d stories h e a r d a b o u t early events" (p. 4 2 ) . In o t h e r words, the belief that hyp-

nosis somehow allows clients to retrieve a c c u r a t e m e m o r i e s of early traumatic

e x p e r i e n c e s is misguided a n d may be subject to all the m e m o r y e r r o r s that exist

in a nonhypnotized state. This, t h e a u t h o r s c o n t e n d , may in s o m e cases, lead to

false m e m o r i e s a n d accusation of abuse that never h a p p e n e d . Spanos elabo-

rated his perspective on this potential misuse of hypnotic techniques in his 1 9 9 4

book, Multiple Identities & False Memories: A Sociocognitive Perspective.

C O N C L U S I O N

Clearly, t h e d e b a t e goes on. Spanos c o n t i n u e d his r e s e a r c h until his untimely

death in a plane crash in J u n e 1 9 9 4 (see M c C o n k e y & S h e e h a n , 1 9 9 5 ) . A sum-

m a r y of his early work on hypnosis can be found in his 1 9 8 8 book, Hypnosis:

64 Chapter II Perception and Consciousness

The Cognitive-Behavioral Perspedive. Nicholas Spanos was a prolific a n d well-

r e s p e c t e d behavioral scientist who has b e e n missed greatly by his colleagues

a n d by all those w h o l e a r n e d a n d benefited from his work (see Baker, 1 9 9 4 , for

a eulogy to Nick S p a n o s ) . And, clearly, his r e s e a r c h legacy will be c a r r i e d o n by

others. His work on hypnosis c h a n g e d psychology in that he offered an experi­

mentally based, alternative e x p l a n a t i o n for an aspect of h u m a n consciousness

a n d behavior that was virtually u n c h a l l e n g e d for nearly 2 0 0 years.

Baker, R. ( 1 9 9 4 ) . In memóriám: Nick Spanos. Skeptical Inquirer, 18(5), 459. Hilgard, E. ( 1 9 7 8 ) . Hypnosis and consciousness. Human Nature, 1, 4 2 - 5 1 . Kihlstrom.J. F. ( 1 9 9 8 ) . Attributions, awareness, and dissociation: In memóriám Kenneth S. Bowers,

1 9 3 7 - 1 9 9 6 . American Journal ofClinical Hypnosis, 40(3), 194-205. Lazar, B., and Dempster, C. ( 1 9 8 1 ) . Failures in hypnosis and hypnotherapy: a review. American

Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 24(1), 4 8 - 5 4 . Lynn, S. ( 1 9 9 7 ) . Automaticity and hypnosis: A sociocognitive account. InternationalJournal of Clin­

ical and Experimental Hypnosis, 45(3), 2 3 9 - 2 5 0 . Lynn, S., Loftus, E., Lilienfeld, S., & Lock, T. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Memory recovery techniques in psychother­

apy: Problems and pitfalls. Skeptical Inquirer, 27, 4 0 - 4 6 . McConkey, K., & Sheehan, P. ( 1 9 9 5 ) . Nicholas Spanos: Reflections with gratitude. Contemporary

Hypnosis, 12, 3 6 - 3 8 . Spanos, N. ( 1 9 9 4 ) . Multiple identities & false memories: A sociocognitive perspective. Washington, DC:

American Psychological Association. Spanos, N, & Chaves, J. ( 1 9 8 8 ) . Hypnosis: The cognitive-behavioral perspective. New York: Prometheus. Stăm, H. J . , & Spanos, N. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . Experimental designs, expectancy effects, and hypnotic analge­

sia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 89, 7 5 1 - 7 6 2 .

LEARNING AND CONDITIONING

R e a d i n g 9 IT'S N O T J U S T A B O U T S A L I V A T I N G D O G S !

R e a d i n g 1 0 L I T T L E E M O T I O N A L A L B E R T

R e a d i n g 1 1 K N O C K W O O D !

R e a d i n g 1 2 S E E A G G R E S S I O N . . . D O A G G R E S S I O N !

The a r e a of psychology c o n c e r n e d with l e a r n i n g has p r o d u c e d a r a t h e r well-defined body of literature e x p l a i n i n g t h e p r o c e s s underlying how animals a n d h u m a n s l e a r n . S o m e o f t h e m o s t f a m o u s n a m e s i n t h e history o f psychol-

ogy have m a d e their m o s t influential discoveries in this field—names t h a t a r e

easily r e c o g n i z e d by those b o t h inside a n d outside t h e behavioral sciences,

such as Pavlov, Watson, Skinner, a n d B a n d u r a . Picking a few of t h e m o s t sig-

nificant studies f r o m this b r a n c h of psychology a n d f r o m these r e s e a r c h e r s is

no easy task, but t h e articles selected h e r e c a n be f o u n d in nearly every i n t r o -

d u c t o r y psychology t e x t b o o k a n d a r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e e n o r m o u s c o n t r i -

butions of these scientists.

F o r Ivan Pavlov, we take a j o u r n e y back to the early 1 9 0 0 s to review his work

with dogs, m e t r o n o m e s , bells, salivation, a n d the discovery of t h e conditioned re-

flex. Second, J o h n Watson, known for many contributions, is probably most

famous (notorious?) for his 1 9 2 0 ethically challenged e x p e r i m e n t with Little

Albert, which d e m o n s t r a t e d for the first time how emotions could be shown to

be a p r o d u c t of the environment r a t h e r than purely internal processes. F o r the

third study in this section, we discuss B. F. Skinner's famous demonstration of

superstitious behavior in a pigeon a n d his explanation for how h u m a n s b e c o m e

superstitious in exacdy the same way. F o u r t h , we e x a m i n e the well-known "Bobo

Doll Study," in which Albert B a n d u r a established that aggressive behaviors could

be learned by children through their modeling of adult violence.

Reading 9: IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT SALIVATING DOGS! Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes. London: Oxford University Press.

Have you ever walked into a dentist's office where the o d o r of the disinfectant

m a d e your teeth hurt? If you have, it was probably because the o d o r triggered

an association that h a d b e e n c o n d i t i o n e d in your brain between that smell a n d

65

66 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

y o u r past e x p e r i e n c e s at the dentist. W h e n you h e a r ' T h e Star Spangled B a n -

ner" played at the Olympic Games, does your h e a r t beat a litde faster? T h a t hap-

pens to m o s t Americans. Does t h e same thing h a p p e n when you h e a r t h e Italian

national a n t h e m ? Unless you were raised in Italy, most likely it does not, because

you have b e e n c o n d i t i o n e d to r e s p o n d to o n e a n t h e m but n o t to the other. A n d

why do s o m e people squint a n d b e c o m e n e r v o u s if you inflate a balloon n e a r

t h e m ? It is because they have l e a r n e d to associate the e x p a n d i n g balloon with

something fearful (such as a loud pop!). T h e s e a r e just a few of countless h u m a n

behaviors that exist because of a process known as classical conditioning.

T h e classical c o n d i t i o n i n g t h e o r y o f l e a r n i n g was d e v e l o p e d a n d articu-

lated nearly a h u n d r e d years a g o in Russia by o n e of t h e m o s t familiar n a m e s

in t h e history of psychology, Ivan P e t r o v i c h Pavlov ( 1 8 4 9 - 1 9 4 6 ) . Unlike m o s t

of t h e r e s e a r c h p r e s e n t e d in this book, Pavlov's n a m e a n d his basic ideas of

l e a r n i n g by association a r e widely r e c o g n i z e d in p o p u l a r c u l t u r e (even a

Rolling Stones song f r o m t h e 1 9 7 0 s c o n t a i n e d t h e line "I salivate like a Pavlov

d o g " ) . However, how Pavlov c a m e t o m a k e his l a n d m a r k discoveries a n d t h e

t r u e significance of his work a r e n o t so widely u n d e r s t o o d .

A l t h o u g h Pavlov's c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o psychology were a m o n g o f t h e m o s t

i m p o r t a n t ever m a d e , technically he was n o t a psychologist at all but, r a t h e r , a

p r o m i n e n t Russian physiologist studying digestive processes. In 1 9 0 4 , his r e -

s e a r c h on digestion e a r n e d h i m t h e N o b e l Prize for s c i e n c e . Yet t h e discover-

ies t h a t dramatically c h a n g e d his c a r e e r , a n d t h e history of psychology, b e g a n

virtually by a c c i d e n t . In t h e late 1 8 0 0 s , psychology was a very y o u n g field of sci-

entific study a n d was c o n s i d e r e d by m a n y to be s o m e t h i n g less t h a n a t r u e sci-

e n c e . T h e r e f o r e , Pavlov's decision to m a k e such a radical t u r n f r o m t h e m o r e

solid a n d r e s p e c t e d s c i e n c e of physiology to t h e fledgling study of psychology

was a risky c a r e e r move. He wrote a b o u t this d i l e m m a facing a physiologist in

t h e early 1 9 0 0 s whose work m i g h t t u r n to studying t h e brain a n d behavior:

It is logical that in its analysis of the various activities of living matter, physiology should base itself on the more advanced and more exact sciences, physics and chemistry. But if we attempt an approach from this science of psychology . . . we shall be building our superstructure on a science that has no claim to exact- ness . . . . In fact, it is still open to discussion whether psychology is a natural sci- ence, or whether it can be regarded as a science at all. (p. 3)

L o o k i n g back on Pavlov's discoveries, it was f o r t u n a t e for t h e a d v a n c e m e n t of

psychological s c i e n c e a n d for o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f h u m a n behavior t h a t h e

t o o k t h e risk a n d m a d e t h e c h a n g e .

Pavlov's physiological r e s e a r c h involved t h e use of dogs as subjects for

studying t h e r o l e of salivation on digestion. He or his assistants would intro-

d u c e various types of food or n o n f o o d substances into a dog's m o u t h a n d ob-

s e r v e t h e r a t e a n d a m o u n t o f salivation. T o m e a s u r e salivation scientifically,

m i n o r s u r g e r y was p e r f o r m e d on t h e dogs so t h a t a salivary d u c t was redi-

r e c t e d t h r o u g h an incision in t h e dog's c h e e k a n d c o n n e c t e d to a tube that

would collect t h e saliva. T h r o u g h o u t this r e s e a r c h , Pavlov m a d e m a n y new

a n d fascinating discoveries. F o r e x a m p l e , he found t h a t w h e n a d o g received

Reading 9 It's Not Just About Salivating Dogs! 67

moist food, only a small a m o u n t of saliva would be p r o d u c e d , c o m p a r e d with

a heavy flow when d r y food was p r e s e n t e d . T h e p r o d u c t i o n of saliva u n d e r

these varying c o n d i t i o n s was r e g a r d e d by Pavlov as a reflex, t h a t is, a r e s p o n s e

that o c c u r s automatically to a specific stimulus without t h e n e e d for any learn-

ing. If you think a b o u t it, salivation is purely reflexive for h u m a n s , t o o . Sup-

pose I ask you, as you r e a d this s e n t e n c e , to salivate as heavily as you c a n . You

c a n n o t do it. B u t if you a r e h u n g r y a n d find yourself sitting in f r o n t of y o u r fa-

vorite food, you will salivate w h e t h e r you want to or not.

As Pavlov c o n t i n u e d his r e s e a r c h , he b e g a n to n o t i c e strange events that

were totally u n e x p e c t e d . T h e dogs b e g a n to salivate before any food r e a c h e d

their m o u t h s a n d even before t h e o d o r of food was present. After a while, t h e

dogs were salivating at times when no salivary stimulus was p r e s e n t at all. S o m e -

how, the reflexive action of the salivary glands h a d b e e n altered t h r o u g h t h e

animals' e x p e r i e n c e in the lab: "Even t h e vessel from which t h e food has b e e n

given is sufficient to evoke an a l i m e n t a r y reflex [ o f salivation] c o m p l e t e in all

its details; a n d , further, t h e secretion may be provoked even by t h e sight of t h e

person who has b r o u g h t the vessel, or by t h e s o u n d of his footsteps" (p. 1 3 ) .

This was the crossroads for Pavlov. He had observed digestive responses oc-

curring to stimuli seemingly unrelated to digestion, a n d p u r e physiology could

not provide an explanation for this. T h e answer h a d to be found in psychology.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

Pavlov theorized that t h e dogs h a d l e a r n e d f r o m e x p e r i e n c e in t h e lab to e x -

p e c t food following t h e a p p e a r a n c e of c e r t a i n signals. A l t h o u g h these signal

stimuli do n o t naturally p r o d u c e salivation, the dogs c a m e to associate t h e m

with food, a n d thus r e s p o n d e d to t h e m with salivation. Consequently, Pavlov

d e t e r m i n e d two kinds of reflexes m u s t exist.

Unconditioned reflexes are i n b o r n a n d a u t o m a t i c , r e q u i r e no l e a r n i n g , a n d

a r e generally t h e s a m e for all m e m b e r s of a species. Salivating w h e n f o o d en-

ters t h e m o u t h , j u m p i n g a t t h e s o u n d o f a loud noise, a n d t h e dilation o f y o u r

pupils in low light a r e e x a m p l e s of u n c o n d i t i o n e d reflexes. Conditioned reflexes,

o n t h e o t h e r h a n d , a r e a c q u i r e d t h r o u g h e x p e r i e n c e o r l e a r n i n g a n d may

vary a g r e a t deal a m o n g individual m e m b e r s of a species. A d o g salivating at

the s o u n d of footsteps, or you feeling pain in y o u r t e e t h when you smell den-

tal disinfectant, a r e c o n d i t i o n e d reflexes.

Unconditioned reflexes a r e f o r m e d by an unconditioned stimulus ( U C S ) p r o -

ducing an unconditioned response ( U C R ) . In Pavlov's studies, t h e U C S was f o o d

a n d t h e U C R was salivation. Conditioned reflexes consist of a conditioned stimulus

( C S ) , such as t h e footsteps, p r o d u c i n g a conditioned response ( C R ) , salivation.

You will n o t i c e that the r e s p o n s e in b o t h these e x a m p l e s is salivation, but

when t h e salivation results f r o m h e a r i n g footsteps, it is t h e learning a n d n o t

the dog's natural t e n d e n c i e s , t h a t p r o d u c e d it.

Pavlov wanted to answer this question: C o n d i t i o n e d reflexes a r e n o t in-

b o r n , so exactly how a r e they a c q u i r e d ? He p r o p o s e d t h a t if a p a r t i c u l a r stim-

ulus in t h e dog's e n v i r o n m e n t was often p r e s e n t w h e n t h e d o g was fed, this

68 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

Stepl UCS • UCR (food) (salivation)

Step 2 NS + UCS • UCR (footsteps) + (food) (salivation)

Step 3 (Repeat step 2 several times)

Step 4 C S • CR (footsteps) (salivation)

Now t h a t he h a d a t h e o r y to explain his observations, Pavlov b e g a n a se-

ries of e x p e r i m e n t s to p r o v e that it was c o r r e c t . It is c o m m o n l y believed that

Pavlov c o n d i t i o n e d dogs to salivate at t h e s o u n d of a bell, which was t r u e of his

l a t e r studies. B u t as you will see, his early e x p e r i m e n t s involved a m e t r o n o m e .

M E T H O D A N D R E S U L T S

Pavlov was able to build a special l a b o r a t o r y at t h e Institute of E x p e r i m e n t a l

M e d i c i n e i n P e t r o g r a d (which b e c a m e L e n i n g r a d following L e n i n ' s d e a t h

a n d h a s now r e t u r n e d to its original n a m e of St. P e t e r s b u r g ) with funds do-

n a t e d by a p h i l a n t h r o p i c businessman f r o m Moscow. This s o u n d p r o o f lab al-

lowed for c o m p l e t e isolation o f t h e subjects from t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r s a n d from

all e x t r a n e o u s stimuli d u r i n g t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o c e d u r e s . T h e r e f o r e , a spe-

cific stimulus c o u l d b e a d m i n i s t e r e d a n d responses c o u l d b e r e c o r d e d without

any d i r e c t c o n t a c t between t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r s a n d t h e animals.

After Pavlov h a d established this c o n t r o l l e d r e s e a r c h e n v i r o n m e n t , t h e

p r o c e d u r e was quite simple. Pavlov c h o s e food as t h e u n c o n d i t i o n e d stimulus.

As e x p l a i n e d previously, f o o d will elicit t h e u n c o n d i t i o n e d r e s p o n s e of saliva-

tion. T h e n Pavlov n e e d e d to find a n e u t r a l stimulus t h a t was, for t h e dogs,

c o m p l e t e l y u n r e l a t e d t o food. F o r this h e used t h e s o u n d o f t h e m e t r o n o m e .

O v e r several c o n d i t i o n i n g trials, t h e d o g was e x p o s e d to t h e ticking of t h e

m e t r o n o m e a n d t h e n was immediately p r e s e n t e d with food. "A stimulus which

stimulus would b e c o m e associated in t h e dog's brain with food; it would signal

t h e a p p r o a c h i n g food. P r i o r to being p a i r e d with t h e food, the e n v i r o n m e n t a l

stimulus did n o t p r o d u c e any i m p o r t a n t r e s p o n s e . I n o t h e r words, t o t h e dogs,

it was a neutral stimulus ( N S ) . W h e n t h e dogs first arrived at t h e lab, t h e assis-

tant's footsteps m i g h t have p r o d u c e d a r e s p o n s e of curiosity (Pavlov called it

t h e "What is it?" r e s p o n s e ) , b u t h e a r i n g t h e footsteps certainly would n o t have

c a u s e d t h e dogs to salivate. T h e footsteps, t h e n , w e r e a n e u t r a l stimulus. How-

ever, o v e r time, as t h e d o g s h e a r d t h e s a m e footsteps just p r i o r to being fed

every day, they would begin to associate t h e s o u n d with food. Eventually, ac-

c o r d i n g to t h e theory, t h e footsteps a l o n e would c a u s e t h e dogs to salivate.

Pavlov p r o p o s e d that t h e p r o c e s s by which a n e u t r a l stimulus b e c o m e s a c o n -

d i t i o n e d stimulus c o u l d be d i a g r a m m e d as follows:

Reading 9 It's Not Just About Salivating Dogs! 69

was n e u t r a l o f itself h a d b e e n s u p e r i m p o s e d u p o n t h e a c t i o n o f t h e i n b o r n al-

i m e n t a r y reflex. W e o b s e r v e d that, after several repetitions o f t h e c o m b i n e d

stimulation, t h e sounds o f t h e m e t r o n o m e h a d a c q u i r e d t h e p r o p e r t y o f stim-

ulating salivary s e c r e t i o n " ( p . 2 6 ) . I n o t h e r words, t h e m e t r o n o m e h a d be-

c o m e a c o n d i t i o n e d stimulus for t h e c o n d i t i o n e d r e s p o n s e of salivation.

Pavlov a n d his associates e l a b o r a t e d on this p r e l i m i n a r y finding by using

different u n c o n d i t i o n e d a n d n e u t r a l stimuli. F o r e x a m p l e , they p r e s e n t e d t h e

o d o r of vanilla ( N S ) to t h e subjects p r i o r to p l a c i n g a l e m o n juice-like solu-

tion i n t h e dog's m o u t h ( t h e U C S ) . T h e j u i c e c a u s e d heavy salivation ( U C R ) .

After 20 repetitions of t h e pairing, t h e vanilla a l o n e p r o d u c e d salivation. F o r a

visual test, t h e dogs were e x p o s e d to an o b j e c t that b e g a n to r o t a t e j u s t p r i o r

to the p r e s e n t a t i o n of food. After only 5 pairings, t h e r o t a t i n g o b j e c t by itself

(CS) caused t h e dogs to salivate ( C R ) .

T h e i m p o r t a n c e a n d application o f Pavlov's work e x t e n d s far b e y o n d

salivating dogs. His t h e o r i e s of classical c o n d i t i o n i n g e x p l a i n e d a m a j o r p o r -

tion of h u m a n behavior a n d h e l p e d to l a u n c h psychology as a t r u e s c i e n c e .

S I G N I F I C A N C E O F T H E F I N D I N G S

T h e t h e o r y of classical c o n d i t i o n i n g (also called Pavlovian c o n d i t i o n i n g ) is

universally a c c e p t e d a n d has r e m a i n e d virtually u n c h a n g e d since its c o n c e p -

tion t h r o u g h Pavlov's work. It is used to explain a n d i n t e r p r e t a wide r a n g e of

h u m a n behavior, including w h e r e phobias c o m e f r o m , why you dislike c e r t a i n

foods, t h e s o u r c e of y o u r e m o t i o n s , how advertising works, why y o u feel anxi-

ety before a j o b interview or an e x a m , a n d what a r o u s e s y o u sexually. Several

feter studies dealing with s o m e of these applications a r e discussed h e r e .

Classical conditioning focuses on reflexive behavior: those behaviors that

a r e not u n d e r your voluntary c o n t r o l . Any reflex c a n be c o n d i t i o n e d to o c c u r to

a previously neutral stimulus. You c a n be classically c o n d i t i o n e d so that y o u r left

eye blinks when you h e a r a doorbell, your h e a r t rate increases at t h e sight of a

flashing blue light, or you e x p e r i e n c e sexual arousal when you eat strawberries.

T h e doorbell, blue light, a n d strawberries were all neutral in relation to t h e c o n -

ditioned responses until they somehow b e c a m e associated with u n c o n d i t i o n e d

stimuli for eye blinking (e.g., a puff of air into the e y e ) , h e a r t rate increase (e.g.,

a sudden loud n o i s e ) , a n d sexual arousal (e.g., r o m a n t i c caresses).

To e x p e r i e n c e firsthand t h e process of classical conditioning, h e r e is an

e x p e r i m e n t you can p e r f o r m on yourself. All you will n e e d is a bell, a m i r r o r ,

a n d , to serve as your t e m p o r a r y laboratory, a r o o m that b e c o m e s completely

dark when the light is switched off. T h e pupils of your eyes dilate a n d constrict

reflexively a c c o r d i n g to c h a n g e s in light intensity. You have no voluntary c o n t r o l

over this, a n d you did n o t have to learn how to do it. If I say to you "Please dilate

your pupils now," you would be unable to do so. However, when you walk into a

dark theater, they dilate immediately. T h e r e f o r e , a d e c r e a s e in light would be

considered an u n c o n d i t i o n e d stimulus for pupil dilation, t h e u n c o n d i t i o n e d r e -

sponse. In your t e m p o r a r y lab, r m g t h e bell a n d , immediately after, t u r n off t h e

light. Wait in the total darkness a b o u t 15 seconds a n d t u r n the light back o n .

70 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

Wait a n o t h e r 15 seconds a n d r e p e a t t h e p r o c e d u r e : bell . . . light off . . . wait

1 5 s e c o n d s . . . light o n . . . . R e p e a t this pairing o f t h e neutral stimulus ( t h e bell)

with t h e u n c o n d i t i o n e d stimulus ( t h e darkness) 10 to 20 times, making sure

that t h e bell only rings just p r i o r to the sudden darkness. Now, with the lights o n ,

watch y o u r eyes closely in t h e m i r r o r a n d ring the bell. You will see your pupils

dilate slightly even though t h e r e is no c h a n g e in light! T h e bell has b e c o m e the

c o n d i t i o n e d stimulus a n d pupil dilation t h e c o n d i t i o n e d response.

R E L A T E D R E S E A R C H A N D R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Two o t h e r studies p r e s e n t e d in this b o o k rest directly on Pavlov's t h e o r y of

classical c o n d i t i o n i n g . I n t h e n e x t article, J o h n B . Watson c o n d i t i o n e d 1 1 -

m o n t h - o l d Little Albert to fear a white rat ( a n d o t h e r furry things) by em-

ploying t h e s a m e principles Pavlov used to c o n d i t i o n salivation in dogs. By

d o i n g so, W a t s o n d e m o n s t r a t e d how e m o t i o n s , such as fear, a r e f o r m e d . L a t e r ,

J o s e p h W o l p e (see C h a p t e r I X o n p s y c h o t h e r a p y ) developed a t h e r a p e u t i c

t e c h n i q u e for t r e a t i n g intense fears ( p h o b i a s ) by applying t h e c o n c e p t s of

classical c o n d i t i o n i n g . His work was based on t h e idea that t h e association be-

tween t h e c o n d i t i o n e d stimulus a n d t h e u n c o n d i t i o n e d stimulus must be bro-

ken in o r d e r to r e d u c e t h e fearful r e s p o n s e .

T h i s line o f r e s e a r c h o n classical c o n d i t i o n i n g a n d phobias c o n t i n u e s t o

t h e p r e s e n t . F o r e x a m p l e , studies have f o u n d t h a t c h i l d r e n whose p a r e n t s

have p h o b i a s may develop t h e s a m e phobias to objects such as snakes a n d spi-

d e r s t h r o u g h 'Vicarious" c o n d i t i o n i n g f r o m m o m a n d d a d without any d i r e c t

e x p o s u r e t o t h e f e a r e d o b j e c t ( F r e d r i k s o n , Annas, & Wik, 1 9 9 7 ) . T h e c o u n t -

less applications of Pavlov's t h e o r y in the psychological a n d m e d i c a l l i t e r a t u r e

a r e far t o o n u m e r o u s to s u m m a r i z e in any detail h e r e . Instead, a few addi-

tional e x a m p l e s o f t h e m o r e n o t a b l e findings a r e discussed.

A c o m m o n p r o b l e m that plagues r a n c h e r s a r o u n d the world is that of

p r e d a t o r y animals, usually wolves a n d coyotes, killing a n d eating their live-

stock. In t h e early 1 9 7 0 s , studies were c o n d u c t e d t h a t a t t e m p t e d to apply

Pavlovian c o n d i t i o n i n g t e c h n i q u e s to solve the p r o b l e m of t h e killing of sheep

by coyotes a n d wolves without t h e n e e d for killing t h e p r e d a t o r s (see Gustafson

e t al., 1 9 7 4 ) . Wolves a n d coyotes were given pieces o f m u t t o n ( m e a t from

s h e e p ) c o n t a i n i n g small a m o u n t s of lithium c h l o r i d e ( U C S ) , a c h e m i c a l that if

ingested, m a k e s an a n i m a l sick. W h e n t h e animals a t e t h e m e a t , they b e c a m e

dizzy, with severe n a u s e a a n d vomiting ( U C R ) . After recovering, these s a m e

h u n g r y p r e d a t o r s were p l a c e d in a p e n with live sheep. T h e wolves a n d coyotes

b e g a n to attack t h e s h e e p ( C S ) , but as soon as they smelled their prey, they

s t o p p e d a n d stayed as far away f r o m t h e sheep as possible. W h e n t h e gate to the

p e n was o p e n e d , t h e wolves a n d coyotes actually r a n away from t h e sheep!

Based o n this a n d o t h e r r e l a t e d r e s e a r c h , r a n c h e r s c o m m o n l y use this m e t h o d

of classical conditioning to k e e p wolves a n d coyotes away from their herds.

A n o t h e r potentially vital a r e a o f r e s e a r c h involving classical condition-

ing is in t h e field of behavioral m e d i c i n e . Studies have suggested that the a c -

tivity of t h e i m m u n e system c a n be a l t e r e d using Pavlovian principles. A d e r

Reading 9 It's Not Just About Salivating Dogs! 71

a n d C o h e n ( 1 9 8 5 ) gave m i c e water f l a v o r e d with s a c c h a r i n e ( m i c e love this

w a t e r ) . T h e y t h e n p a i r e d t h e s a c c h a r i n e water with an injection of a d r u g that

w e a k e n e d t h e i m m u n e system o f t h e m i c e . L a t e r , w h e n these c o n d i t i o n e d

m i c e were given t h e s a c c h a r i n e water bu t no injection, they showed signs of

i m m u n o s u p p r e s s i o n , a weakening of t h e i m m u n e r e s p o n s e . R e s e a r c h is un-

derway (primarily within a psychology subfield called psychoneuroimmunology)

to study if t h e reverse is also possible, if i m m u n e enhancing r e s p o n s e s may be

classically c o n d i t i o n e d . Overall, r e s e a r c h is d e m o n s t r a t i n g that classical c o n d i -

tioning may i n d e e d h o l d p r o m i s e for increasing t h e effectiveness o f i m m u n e

system responses in h u m a n s (Miller & C o h e n , 2 0 0 1 ) . J u s t imagine: in t h e fu-

t u r e , you may be able to s t r e n g t h e n y o u r resistance to illness by e x p o s i n g your-

self to a nonmedical c o n d i t i o n e d stimulus. F o r e x a m p l e , i m a g i n e you feel t h e

beginnings of a cold or t h e flu, so you t u n e i n t o y o u r special classically c o n d i -

tioned "immune r e s p o n s e e n h a n c e m e n t music" o n y o u r iPod. A s t h e m u s i c

fills y o u r ears, y o u r resistance rises as a c o n d i t i o n e d r e s p o n s e to this stimulus

a n d stops t h e disease in its tracks.

As a demonstration of t h e continuing i m p a c t of Pavlov's discoveries on

today's psychological r e s e a r c h , consider the following. Since 2 0 0 0 , m o r e than a

thousand scientific articles have cited Pavlov's work that forms t h e basis for this

discussion. O n e especially fascinating r e c e n t study d e m o n s t r a t e d how your psy-

chological state at the time of conditioning a n d extinction may play a p a r t in t h e

t r e a t m e n t of classically c o n d i t i o n e d irrational fears, called phobias (Mystkowski

et al., 2 0 0 3 ) . R e s e a r c h e r s used desensitization techniques to treat participants

who were terrified of spiders. S o m e received the t r e a t m e n t after ingesting caf-

feine, while others ingested a placebo. A week later, all participants were

r e t e s t e d — s o m e receiving caffeine a n d others a placebo. T h o s e who were given

the placebo during t r e a t m e n t , but received real caffeine at the follow-up, and

those who had received real caffeine during t r e a t m e n t , but received a p l a c e b o

at the follow-up, e x p e r i e n c e d a relapse of the fear response. In o t h e r words,

c h a n g i n g the characteristics of a stimulus situation lessens t h e effect of extinc-

tion. However, those who were in t h e same d r u g condition, either caffeine or

placebo, at t r e a t m e n t and follow-up, c o n t i n u e d to e x p e r i e n c e a lowered fear r e -

sponse to spiders. This finding implies that if a classically c o n d i t i o n e d behavior

is successfully placed on extinction, the response may r e t u r n , if the c o n d i t i o n e d

stimulus is e n c o u n t e r e d in a new a n d different situation.

C O N C L U S I O N

T h e s e e x a m p l e s d e m o n s t r a t e how extensive Pavlov's influence has b e e n o n

m a n y scientific a n d r e s e a r c h disciplines. F o r psychology in particular, few sci-

entists have h a d as m u c h i m p a c t in any single discipline. Classical c o n d i t i o n -

ing is o n e of t h e f u n d a m e n t a l t h e o r i e s on which m o d e r n psychology rests.

W i t h o u t Pavlov's c o n t r i b u t i o n s , behavioral scientists still m i g h t have uncov-

e r e d m o s t of these principles over t h e d e c a d e s . It is unlikely, however, t h a t

such a cohesive, elegant, a n d well-articulated t h e o r y of t h e c o n d i t i o n e d reflex

would ever have existed if Pavlov h a d n o t m a d e t h e decision to risk his c a r e e r

72 Chapter HI Learning and Conditioning

a n d v e n t u r e i n t o t h e u n t e s t e d , u n c h a r t e d , a n d highly questionable s c i e n c e o f

n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y psychology.

Ader, R., & Cohen, N. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . CNS-immune system interactions: Conditioning phenomena. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 8, 3 7 9 - 3 9 4 .

Fredrikson, M., Annas, P., & Wik, G. ( 1 9 9 7 ) . Parental history, aversive exposure, and the develop- ment of snake and spider phobias in women. Behavior Research and Therapy, 3 5 ( 1 ) , 2 3 - 2 8 .

Gustafson, C. R., Garcia, J . , Hawkins, W., & Rusiniak, K. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . Coyote predation control by aver- sive conditioning. Science, 184, 5 8 1 - 5 8 3 .

Miller, G., & Cohen, S. ( 2 0 0 1 ) . Psychological interventions and the immune system: A meta- analytic review and critique. Health Psychology, 20, 4 7 - 6 3 .

Mystkowski, J . , Mineka, S., Vernon, L., & Zinbarg, R. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Changes in caffeine stales enhance return of fear in spider phobia. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71, 2 4 3 - 2 5 0 .

Reading 10: LITTLE EMOTIONAL ALBERT Watson, J. B., & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditioned emotional responses. Journal of

Experimental Psychology, 3,1-14.

Have you ever w o n d e r e d w h e r e y o u r e m o t i o n s c o m e f r o m ? I f you have, y o u ' r e

n o t a l o n e . T h e s o u r c e o f o u r e m o t i o n s has fascinated behavioral scientists

t h r o u g h o u t psychology's history. P a r t of t h e e v i d e n c e for this fascination c a n

be f o u n d in this book; f o u r studies a r e i n c l u d e d that relate directly to e m o -

tional r e s p o n s e s ( C h a p t e r V, Harlow, 1 9 5 8 ; C h a p t e r VI, E k m a n & Friesen,

1 9 7 1 ; C h a p t e r VIII, Seligman & Meier, 1 9 6 7 ; a n d C h a p t e r I X , W o l p e , 1 9 6 1 ) .

This study by Watson a n d R a y n e r on c o n d i t i o n e d e m o t i o n a l responses was a

strikingly powerful p i e c e of r e s e a r c h when it was published nearly a c e n t u r y

a g o , a n d it c o n t i n u e s to e x e r t influence today. You would be h a r d pressed to

pick u p a t e x t b o o k o n g e n e r a l psychology o r o n l e a r n i n g a n d behavior with-

o u t finding a s u m m a r y of t h e study's findings.

T h e historical i m p o r t a n c e of this study is n o t solely d u e to t h e r e s e a r c h

findings b u t also to t h e new psychological t e r r i t o r y it p i o n e e r e d . If we c o u l d

be t r a n s p o r t e d b a c k to t h e t u r n of t h e c e n t u r y a n d g e t a feel for t h e state of

psychology at t h e time, we would find it nearly c o m p l e t e l y d o m i n a t e d by t h e

work o f S i g m u n d F r e u d (see t h e r e a d i n g o n A n n a F r e u d i n C h a p t e r V I I I ) .

F r e u d ' s psychoanalytic view of h u m a n b e h a v i o r was based on t h e i d e a t h a t we

a r e motivated by u n c o n s c i o u s instincts a n d r e p r e s s e d conflicts f r o m early

c h i l d h o o d . In simplified F r e u d i a n t e r m s , behavior, t h o u g h t s , a n d e m o t i o n s

a r e g e n e r a t e d internally t h r o u g h biological a n d instinctual processes.

In t h e 1 9 2 0 s , a new m o v e m e n t in psychology known as behaviorism,

s p e a r h e a d e d by Pavlov (as discussed in t h e previous study) a n d Watson, b e g a n

to take hold. T h e behaviorists' viewpoint was radically o p p o s e d to t h e psycho-

analytic s c h o o l a n d p r o p o s e d t h a t behavior is g e n e r a t e d outside t h e p e r s o n

t h r o u g h various e n v i r o n m e n t a l o r situational stimuli. T h e r e f o r e , Watson the-

orized, e m o t i o n a l responses exist in us b e c a u s e we have b e e n c o n d i t i o n e d to

r e s p o n d emotionally to c e r t a i n stimuli that we e n c o u n t e r . In o t h e r words, we

learn o u r e m o t i o n a l reactions. Watson ( 1 9 1 3 ) believed that all h u m a n behavior

Reading 10 Little Emotional Albert 73

was a p r o d u c t of l e a r n i n g a n d conditioning, as he p r o c l a i m e d in his famous statement:

Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own special world to bring them up in, and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to be- come any type of specialist I might select—doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief, and, yes, beggarman and thief.

This was, for its time, an e x t r e m e l y revolutionary view. Most psychologists, as

well as public opinion in g e n e r a l , w e r e n o t r e a d y to a c c e p t these new ideas.

This was especially t r u e for e m o t i o n a l r e a c t i o n s , which s e e m e d to be g e n e r -

a t e d from within t h e p e r s o n . Watson set o u t to d e m o n s t r a t e that specific e m o -

tions could be c o n d i t i o n e d without r e g a r d for any internal forces.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

Watson t h e o r i z e d t h a t if a stimulus automatically p r o d u c e s a c e r t a i n e m o t i o n

in you (such as f e a r ) a n d that stimulus is repeatedly e x p e r i e n c e d at t h e s a m e

m o m e n t as s o m e t h i n g else, such as a rat, t h e rat will b e c o m e associated in

your brain with t h e fear. In o t h e r words, you will eventually b e c o m e c o n d i -

tioned to be afraid of t h e rat (this view reflects Pavlov's t h e o r y of classical c o n -

ditioning) . He m a i n t a i n e d that we a r e n o t b o r n to fear rats but that such fears

a r e l e a r n e d t h r o u g h conditioning. This f o r m e d t h e t h e o r e t i c a l basis for his

m o s t f a m o u s e x p e r i m e n t , which involved a p a r t i c i p a n t n a m e d "Little Albert."

M E T H O D A N D R E S U L T S

T h e participant, Albert B . , was r e c r u i t e d for this study at t h e a g e of 9 m o n t h s

f r o m a hospital w h e r e he h a d b e e n raised as an o r p h a n f r o m birth. T h e r e -

s e a r c h e r s a n d t h e hospital staff j u d g e d h i m to be very healthy, b o t h e m o t i o n -

ally a n d physically. To see if A l b e r t was naturally afraid of c e r t a i n stimuli, t h e

r e s e a r c h e r s p r e s e n t e d h i m with a white rat, a rabbit, a monkey, a dog, masks

with a n d without hair, a n d white c o t t o n wool. Albert's r e a c t i o n s to these stim-

uli were closely obse rved. Albert was interested in t h e various a n i m a l s a n d ob-

j e c t s a n d would r e a c h for t h e m a n d s o m e t i m e s t o u c h t h e m , but h e n e v e r

showed t h e slightest fear o f t h e m . B e c a u s e they p r o d u c e d n o fear, these a r e

r e f e r r e d to as neutral stimuli.

T h e n e x t p h a s e o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t involved d e t e r m i n i n g i f a fear r e a c -

tion c o u l d be p r o d u c e d by e x p o s i n g Albert to a l o u d noise. This was n o t diffi-

cult, b e c a u s e all h u m a n s , a n d especially infants, will exhibit fear r e a c t i o n s to

loud, sudden noises. B e c a u s e no l e a r n i n g is n e c e s s a r y for this r e s p o n s e to

o c c u r , t h e loud noise is called an unconditioned stimulus. In this study, a steel

b a r 4 feet in length was struck with a h a m m e r j u s t b e h i n d Albert. This noise

startled a n d frightened h i m a n d m a d e h i m cry.

Now the stage was set for testing t h e idea that the e m o t i o n of fear c o u l d be

conditioned in Albert. T h e actual conditioning tests were n o t d o n e until the

child was 11 m o n t h s old. T h e r e s e a r c h e r s were hesitant to c r e a t e fear reactions

74 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

in a child experimentally, but they m a d e t h e decision to p r o c e e d based on what

was, in retrospect, questionable ethical reasoning. (This is discussed in c o n j u n c -

tion with the overall ethical problems of this study, elsewhere in this review.)

As t h e e x p e r i m e n t b e g a n , t h e r e s e a r c h e r s p r e s e n t e d Albert with t h e

white rat. At first, Albert was interested in t h e r a t a n d r e a c h e d o u t to t o u c h it.

As he did this, t h e m e t a l b a r was struck, which startled a n d frightened Albert.

This p r o c e s s was r e p e a t e d t h r e e times. O n e week later, t h e same p r o c e d u r e

was followed. After a total of seven pairings of t h e noise a n d the rat, t h e rat

was p r e s e n t e d to Albert a l o n e , without t h e noise. As you've probably guessed

by now, Albert r e a c t e d with e x t r e m e fear to t h e rat. He b e g a n to cry, t u r n e d

away, rolled over on o n e side away f r o m t h e rat, a n d b e g a n to crawl away so

fast that t h e r e s e a r c h e r s h a d to rush to c a t c h him before he crawled off the

e d g e of t h e table! A fear r e s p o n s e h a d b e e n c o n d i t i o n e d to an o b j e c t that h a d

n o t b e e n f e a r e d only o n e week earlier.

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s t h e n wanted t o d e t e r m i n e i f this l e a r n e d fear would

transfer to o t h e r objects. In psychological t e r m s , this transfer is r e f e r r e d to as

generalization. If A l b e r t showed fear of o t h e r similar objects, t h e n t h e l e a r n e d

b e h a v i o r is said to have generalized. T h e n e x t week, Albert was tested again

a n d was still f o u n d to be afraid of t h e rat. T h e n , to test for generalization, an

o b j e c t similar to t h e r a t (a white rabbit) was p r e s e n t e d to Albert. In t h e au-

t h o r ' s words:

Negative responses began at once. He leaned as far away from the animal as pos- sible, whimpered, then burst into tears. When the rabbit was placed in contact with him, he buried his face in the mattress, then got up on all fours and crawled away, crying as he went. (p. 6)

R e m e m b e r , A l b e r t was n o t afraid o f t h e rabbit p r i o r t o c o n d i t i o n i n g , a n d h a d

n o t b e e n c o n d i t i o n e d t o fear t h e rabbit specifically.

Little Albert was p r e s e n t e d o v e r t h e c o u r s e of this day of testing with a

d o g , a white fur c o a t , a p a c k a g e of c o t t o n , a n d Watson's own h e a d of gray hair.

H e r e a c t e d t o all o f these items with fear. O n e o f t h e m o s t well-known tests o f

g e n e r a l i z a t i o n that m a d e this r e s e a r c h as infamous as it is famous o c c u r r e d

w h e n W a t s o n p r e s e n t e d A l b e r t with a S a n t a Claus mask. T h e r e a c t i o n ? Yes . . .

fear! After a n o t h e r 5 days A l b e r t was tested again. T h e s e q u e n c e of presenta-

tions on this day a r e s u m m a r i z e d in Table 1 0 - 1 .

A n o t h e r a s p e c t o f c o n d i t i o n e d e m o t i o n a l responses Watson wanted t o

e x p l o r e was w h e t h e r t h e l e a r n e d e m o t i o n would transfer f r o m o n e situation

t o a n o t h e r . I f Albert's fear responses t o these various animals a n d objects o c -

c u r r e d only in t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l setting a n d n o w h e r e else, t h e significance of

t h e findings would be greatly r e d u c e d . To test this, later on t h e day outlined

in Table 1 0 - 1 , Albert was taken to an entirely different r o o m with b r i g h t e r

lighting a n d m o r e p e o p l e p r e s e n t . In this new setting, Albert's r e a c t i o n s to t h e

rat a n d rabbit were still clearly fearful, a l t h o u g h s o m e w h a t less intense.

T h e final test that Watson a n d Rayner wanted to m a k e was to see if

Albert's newly l e a r n e d e m o t i o n a l responses would persist over time. Albert h a d

Reading 10 Little Emotional Albert 75

TABLE 10-1 Sequence of Stimulus Presentations to Albert on Fourth Day of Testing

STIMULUS PRESENTED REACTION OBSERVED

1. Blocks Played with blocks as usual 2. Rat Fearful withdrawal (no crying) 3. Rat + Noise Fear and crying 4. Rat Fear and crying 5. Rat Fear, crying, and crawling away 6. Rabbit Fear, but less strong reaction than on former presentations 7. Blocks Played as usual 8. Rabbit Same as 6 9. Rabbit Same as 6

10. Rabbit Some fear, but also wanted to touch rabbit 11. Dog Fearful avoidance 12. Dog + Noise Fear and crawling away 13. Blocks Normal play

been a d o p t e d a n d was scheduled to leave the hospital in the n e a r future. T h e r e -

fore, all testing was discontinued for a period of 31 days. At the e n d of this time,

he was o n c e again presented with the Santa Claus mask, the white fur c o a t , t h e

rat, the rabbit, a n d t h e dog. After a m o n t h , Albert r e m a i n e d very afraid of all

these objects.

Watson a n d his colleagues h a d p l a n n e d to a t t e m p t to recondition Little

Albert a n d eliminate these fearful r e a c t i o n s . However, Albert left t h e hospital

on t h e day these last tests were m a d e , a n d , as far as a n y o n e knows, no r e c o n -

ditioning ever took place.

D I S C U S S I O N A N D S I G N I F I C A N C E O F F I N D I N G S

Watson h a d two f u n d a m e n t a l goals in this study a n d in all his work: ( a ) to

d e m o n s t r a t e that all h u m a n behavior stems f r o m l e a r n i n g a n d c o n d i t i o n i n g

a n d ( b ) t o d e m o n s t r a t e that t h e F r e u d i a n c o n c e p t i o n o f h u m a n n a t u r e , that

o u r behavior stems f r o m u n c o n s c i o u s processes, was wrong. T h i s study, with

all its m e t h o d o l o g i c a l flaws a n d serious b r e a c h e s of ethical c o n d u c t , suc-

c e e d e d to a large e x t e n t in convincing m a n y in t h e psychological c o m m u n i t y

that e m o t i o n a l behavior c o u l d be c o n d i t i o n e d t h r o u g h simple stimulus-

r e s p o n s e techniques. This finding h e l p e d , i n t u r n , t o l a u n c h o n e o f t h e m a j o r

schools o f t h o u g h t i n psychology: behaviorism. H e r e , s o m e t h i n g a s c o m p l e x

a n d p e r s o n a l as an e m o t i o n was shown to be subject to c o n d i t i o n i n g , j u s t as

Pavlov d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t dogs l e a r n to salivate at t h e s o u n d of a m e t r o n o m e .

A logical extension of this is that o t h e r e m o t i o n s , such as anger, joy, sad-

ness, surprise, or disgust, may be l e a r n e d in t h e s a m e m a n n e r . In o t h e r words,

the reason you a r e sad w h e n you h e a r that old song, n e r v o u s when you have a

j o b interview or a public speaking e n g a g e m e n t , happy when spring arrives, or

afraid when you h e a r a dental drill is that you have developed an association in

your brain between these stimuli a n d specific e m o t i o n s t h r o u g h conditioning.

76 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

O t h e r m o r e e x t r e m e e m o t i o n a l responses, such a s phobias a n d sexual fetishes,

may also develop t h r o u g h similar sequences of conditioning.

W a t s o n was quick to p o i n t o u t t h a t his findings c o u l d explain h u m a n be-

havior in r a t h e r straightforward a n d simple t e r m s , c o m p a r e d with the c o m -

plexities of t h e psychoanalytic n o t i o n s of F r e u d a n d his followers. As Watson

a n d R a y n e r e x p l a i n e d in their article, a F r e u d i a n would explain t h u m b suck-

ing as an e x p r e s s i o n of t h e original pleasure-seeking instinct. Albert, however,

would suck his t h u m b w h e n e v e r he felt afraid. As s o o n as his t h u m b e n t e r e d

his m o u t h , his fear lessened. T h e r e f o r e , W a t s o n i n t e r p r e t e d t h u m b sucking as

a c o n d i t i o n e d device for blocking fear-producing stimuli.

An additional questioning of F r e u d i a n thinking in this article c o n -

c e r n e d how F r e u d i a n s in Albert's future, given t h e opportunity, m i g h t analyze

Albert's fear of a white fur c o a t . W a t s o n a n d R a y n e r c l a i m e d that F r e u d i a n an-

alysts "will probably tease f r o m h i m t h e recital of a d r e a m which, u p o n their

analysis, will show that Albert at t h r e e years of a g e a t t e m p t e d to play with t h e

p u b i c h a i r of t h e m o t h e r a n d was scolded violently for it" (p. 1 4 ) . T h e i r main

p o i n t was t h a t they h a d d e m o n s t r a t e d with L i t d e Albert that e m o t i o n a l distur-

b a n c e s in adults c a n n o t always be attributed to sexual t r a u m a s in c h i l d h o o d ,

as t h e F r e u d i a n view m a i n t a i n e d .

Q U E S T I O N S A N D C R I T I C I S M S

As y o u have b e e n r e a d i n g this, y o u have probably b e e n c o n c e r n e d or even an-

g e r e d o v e r t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r ' s t r e a t m e n t o f this i n n o c e n t child. This study

clearly violated c u r r e n t standards of ethical c o n d u c t in r e s e a r c h involving hu-

m a n s . It would be highly unlikely that any institutional review b o a r d at any r e -

s e a r c h institution would a p p r o v e this study today. A c e n t u r y a g o , however,

such ethical standards did n o t formally exist, a n d it is n o t unusual to find r e -

p o r t s in t h e early psychological literature of what now a p p e a r to be question-

able r e s e a r c h m e t h o d s . It must be p o i n t e d o u t that Watson a n d his colleagues

w e r e n o t sadistic or c r u e l p e o p l e a n d that they w e r e e n g a g e d in a new, u n e x -

p l o r e d a r e a o f r e s e a r c h . T h e y a c k n o w l e d g e d their c o n s i d e r a b l e hesitation i n

p r o c e e d i n g with t h e c o n d i t i o n i n g p r o c e s s but d e c i d e d t h a t it was justifiable,

b e c a u s e , in their o p i n i o n , s o m e such fears would arise anyway when Albert left

t h e s h e l t e r e d hospital e n v i r o n m e n t . E v e n so, is it ever a p p r o p r i a t e to frighten

a child to this e x t e n t , regardless of t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e potential discovery?

Today nearly all behavioral scientists would a g r e e t h a t it is not.

A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t p o i n t r e g a r d i n g t h e ethics of this study was t h e fact

t h a t A l b e r t was allowed to leave t h e r e s e a r c h setting a n d was never r e c o n d i -

tioned to r e m o v e his fears. Watson a n d R a y n e r c o n t e n d e d in t h e i r article that

such e m o t i o n a l c o n d i t i o n i n g may persist over a p e r s o n ' s lifetime. If they were

c o r r e c t on this point, it is e x t r e m e l y difficult, f r o m an ethical perspective, to

justify allowing s o m e o n e to g r o w i n t o a d u l t h o o d fearful of all these objects

( a n d w h o knows how m a n y o t h e r s ! ) .

Several r e s e a r c h e r s have criticized Watson's assumption t h a t these c o n -

d i t i o n e d fears would persist indefinitely (e.g., H a r r i s , 1 9 7 9 ) . O t h e r s claim that

Reading 10 Little Emotional Albert 77

Albert was n o t c o n d i t i o n e d as effectively as t h e a u t h o r s m a i n t a i n e d (e.g.,

Samelson, 1 9 8 0 ) . It has frequendy b e e n d e m o n s t r a t e d that behaviors a c q u i r e d

t h r o u g h c o n d i t i o n i n g can b e lost b e c a u s e o f o t h e r e x p e r i e n c e s o r simply be-

cause o f t h e passage o f time. I m a g i n e , for e x a m p l e , that when Albert t u r n e d

a g e five, he was given a pet white rabbit for a birthday present. At first, he

might have been afraid of it ( n o d o u b t baffling his adoptive p a r e n t s ) . As he

c o n t i n u e d to be e x p o s e d to t h e rabbit without anything frightening o c c u r r i n g

(such as that loud n o i s e ) , he would probably slowly b e c o m e less a n d less afraid

until t h e rabbit no l o n g e r caused a fear response. T h i s is a well-established

process in learning psychology called extinction, a n d it h a p p e n s routinely as

p a r t o f the c o n s t a n t learning a n d u n l e a r n i n g , c o n d i t i o n i n g a n d u n c o n d i t i o n -

ing processes we e x p e r i e n c e t h r o u g h o u t o u r lives.

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Watson's 1 9 2 0 article c o n t i n u e s to be cited in r e s e a r c h in a wide r a n g e of ap-

plications, including t h e o r i e s o f effective p a r e n t i n g a n d psychotherapy. O n e

study, e x a m i n e d the facial expressions of e m o t i o n in infants (Sullivan &

Lewis, 2 0 0 3 ) . We know that facial expressions c o r r e s p o n d i n g to specific e m o -

tions a r e consistent a m o n g all adults a n d a c r o s s c u l t u r e s (see t h e r e a d i n g on

E k m a n ' s r e s e a r c h in C h a p t e r V I ) . This study, however, e x t e n d e d this r e s e a r c h

to how such expressions develop in infants a n d what t h e various e x p r e s s i o n s

m e a n at very young ages. A g r e a t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of infants' facial e x p r e s -

sions m i g h t be of g r e a t help in adults' efforts to c o m m u n i c a t e with a n d c a r e

for babies. T h e a u t h o r s n o t e d that t h e i r goal in t h e i r r e s e a r c h was "to provide

p r a c t i t i o n e r s with basic i n f o r m a t i o n to help t h e m a n d t h e p a r e n t s they serve

b e c o m e b e t t e r able t o r e c o g n i z e t h e expressive signals o f t h e infants a n d

young c h i l d r e n i n their c a r e " ( p . 1 2 0 ) . T h e s e a u t h o r s ' use o f Watson's f i n d -

ings offers us a d e g r e e of c o m f o r t in t h a t his questionable r e s e a r c h tactics with

L i t d e Albert, may, in the final analysis, allow us to develop g r e a t e r sensitivity

a n d p e r c e p t i o n into t h e feelings a n d n e e d s o f infants.

As m e n t i o n e d previously in this discussion, o n e e m o t i o n , fear, in its e x -

t r e m e f o r m , c a n p r o d u c e serious negative c o n s e q u e n c e s known as phobias.

Many psychologists believe that phobias a r e c o n d i t i o n e d m u c h like Little Al-

bert's fear o f furry animals (see t h e discussion o f Wolpe's r e s e a r c h o n t h e

t r e a t m e n t o f phobias i n C h a p t e r I X : P s y c h o t h e r a p y ) . Watson's r e s e a r c h has

b e e n i n c o r p o r a t e d into m a n y studies a b o u t t h e origins a n d t r e a t m e n t s o f p h o -

bias. O n e such article discussed phobias f r o m t h e n a t u r e - n u r t u r e perspective

a n d found s o m e r e m a r k a b l e results. Watson's a p p r o a c h , o f c o u r s e , i s r o o t e d

completely i n t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l o r n u r t u r e side o f t h e a r g u m e n t , a n d m o s t

p e o p l e would view phobias as l e a r n e d .

However, a study by Kendler, Karkowski, a n d P r e s c o t t ( 1 9 9 9 ) p r o v i d e d

c o m p e l l i n g evidence that t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of phobias may i n c l u d e a substan-

tial g e n e t i c c o m p o n e n t . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s studied phobias a n d u n r e a s o n a b l e

fears in m o r e than 1 , 7 0 0 female twins (see t h e discussion of B o u c h a r d ' s twin

r e s e a r c h in C h a p t e r I ) . T h e y claim to have f o u n d t h a t a large p e r c e n t a g e of

78 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

t h e variation in phobias was d u e to inherited factors. T h e a u t h o r s c o n c l u d e d

that, a l t h o u g h p h o b i a s may be m o l d e d by an individual's p e r s o n a l e x p e r i -

e n c e s , t h e r o l e of a p e r s o n ' s family in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of phobias is primarily

g e n e t i c , n o t e n v i r o n m e n t a l . I m a g i n e : Born to be phobic! This view flies directly

i n t h e face o f Watson's t h e o r y a n d should provide plenty o f fuel for t h e o n g o -

ing n a t u r e - n u r t u r e d e b a t e in psychology a n d t h r o u g h o u t t h e behavioral

sciences.

Harris, B. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . What ever happened to Little Albert? American Psychologist, 34, 1 5 1 - 1 6 0 . Kendler, K., Karkowski, L., & Prescott, C. ( 1 9 9 9 ) . Fears and phobias: reliability and heritability.

Psychological Mediane, 29(3), 5 3 9 - 5 5 3 . Samelson, F. ( 1 9 8 0 ) . Watson's Little Albert, Cyril Burt's twins, and the need for a critical science.

American Psychologist, 35, 6 1 9 - 6 2 5 . Sullivan, M., & Lewis, M. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Emotional expressions of young infants and children: A practi-

tioner's primer. Infants and Young Children, 16, 1 2 0 - 1 4 2 . Watson.J. B. ( 1 9 1 3 ) . Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychological Review, 20, 1 5 8 - 1 7 7 .

Reading 11: KNOCK WOOD! Skinner, B. F. (1948). Superstition in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychol-

ogy, 38, 168-172.

In this r e a d i n g , we e x a m i n e o n e study f r o m a huge body of r e s e a r c h c a r r i e d

o u t by o n e of t h e m o s t influential a n d m o s t widely known figures in t h e his-

t o r y of psychology: B. F. Skinner ( 1 9 0 4 - 1 9 9 0 ) . Deciding how to p r e s e n t Skin-

n e r a n d which of his multitude of studies to e x p l o r e is a difficult task. It is

impossible to r e p r e s e n t adequately in o n e s h o r t article Skinner's contribu-

tions to t h e history of psychology. After all, Skinner is c o n s i d e r e d by m o s t to

b e t h e f a t h e r o f radical behaviorism, h e was t h e i n v e n t o r o f t h e famous ( o r in-

f a m o u s ) Skinner B o x , a n d h e was t h e a u t h o r o f over 2 0 books a n d many hun-

dreds of scientific articles. This article, with the funny-sounding tide "Superstition

in t h e Pigeon," has b e e n selected f r o m all his work b e c a u s e it allows for a c l e a r

discussion of Skinner's basic t h e o r i e s , provides an interesting e x a m p l e of his

a p p r o a c h to studying behavior, a n d offers a "Skinnerian" e x p l a n a t i o n of a be-

havior with which we a r e all familiar: superstition.

Skinner is r e f e r r e d to as a radical behaviorist b e c a u s e he believed that all

behaviors—including public, or e x t e r n a l behavior, as well as private, or inter-

nal, events such as feelings a n d t h o u g h t s — a r e ultimately l e a r n e d a n d c o n -

trolled by t h e relationships between t h e situation that immediately p r e c e d e s

t h e behavior a n d t h e c o n s e q u e n c e s t h a t directly follow it. A l t h o u g h he be-

lieved t h a t private behaviors a r e difficult to study, he a c k n o w l e d g e d that we all

have o u r own subjective e x p e r i e n c e of these behaviors. He did not, however,

view i n t e r n a l events, such as t h o u g h t s a n d e m o t i o n s , as causes of behavior but

r a t h e r a s p a r t o f t h e m i x o f e n v i r o n m e n t a n d behavior t h a t h e was seeking t o

explain (see S c h n e i d e r & M o r r i s , 1 9 8 7 , for a detailed discussion of t h e t e r m

radical behaviorism).

Reading 11 Knock Wood! 79

To p u t Skinner's t h e o r y in very basic t e r m s : In any given situation, y o u r

behavior is likely to be followed by c o n s e q u e n c e s . S o m e of these c o n s e -

q u e n c e s , such as praise, receiving money, or t h e satisfaction of solving a p r o b -

lem, will m a k e t h e behavior m o r e likely to be r e p e a t e d in f u t u r e , similar

situations. T h e s e c o n s e q u e n c e s a r e called r e i n f o r c e r s . O t h e r c o n s e q u e n c e s ,

such as injuring yourself or feeling e m b a r r a s s e d , will t e n d to m a k e t h e behav-

ior less likely to be r e p e a t e d in similar situations. T h e s e c o n s e q u e n c e s a r e

called punishers. T h e effects o f these relationships between behavior a n d t h e

e n v i r o n m e n t a r e called r e i n f o r c e m e n t a n d p u n i s h m e n t respectively ( E d w a r d

K , M o r r i s , p e r s o n a l c o m m u n i c a t i o n , S e p t e m b e r 1 9 8 7 ) . R e i n f o r c e m e n t a n d

p u n i s h m e n t a r e two of t h e m o s t f u n d a m e n t a l processes in what S k i n n e r r e -

f e r r e d to as o p e r a n t c o n d i t i o n i n g a n d may be d i a g r a m m e d as follows:

Within this conceptualization, Skinner also was able to explain how

l e a r n e d behaviors d e c r e a s e a n d s o m e t i m e s disappear entirely. W h e n a behav-

ior has b e e n r e i n f o r c e d a n d t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t is t h e n withdrawn, t h e likeli-

h o o d of t h e behavior r e o c c u r r i n g will slowly d e c r e a s e until t h e behavior is

effectively suppressed. This process of behavior suppression is called extinction.

If you think a b o u t it, these ideas a r e n o t new to you. T h e p r o c e s s we use

to train o u r pets follows these s a m e rules. You tell a d o g to sit, it sits, a n d you

reward it with a treat. After a while t h e d o g will sit w h e n told t o , even without

a n i m m e d i a t e reward. You have applied t h e principles o f o p e r a n t c o n d i t i o n -

ing. This is a very powerful f o r m of l e a r n i n g a n d is effective with all animals,

even old dogs l e a r n i n g new tricks a n d , yes, even cats! Also, if you want a p e t to

stop doing s o m e t h i n g , all you have to do for t h e behavior to stop is r e m o v e

t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t . F o r e x a m p l e , if y o u r d o g is begging at t h e d i n n e r table,

t h e r e is a r e a s o n for that (regardless of what you may think, dogs a r e n o t b o r n

to beg at t h e t a b l e ) . You have c o n d i t i o n e d this behavior in y o u r d o g t h r o u g h

r e i n f o r c e m e n t . If you want to put that behavior on extinction, t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t

m u s t be totally discontinued. Eventually, t h e d o g will stop begging. By t h e way,

i f o n e m e m b e r o f t h e family c h e a t s d u r i n g e x t i n c t i o n a n d secretly gives t h e c a -

nine b e g g a r s o m e food o n c e in a while, e x t i n c t i o n will n e v e r h a p p e n , b u t t h e

dog will s p e n d m u c h m o r e of its begging e n e r g y n e a r t h a t p e r s o n ' s chair.

B e y o n d these f u n d a m e n t a l s o f learning, S k i n n e r m a i n t a i n e d t h a t all

h u m a n behavior is c r e a t e d a n d m a i n t a i n e d in precisely t h e s a m e way. It's j u s t

that with h u m a n s , t h e e x a c t behaviors a n d c o n s e q u e n c e s a r e n o t always easy

to identify. Skinner was well known for a r g u i n g t h a t if a h u m a n b e h a v i o r was

i n t e r p r e t e d by o t h e r t h e o r e t i c a l a p p r o a c h e s to be d u e to o u r highly evolved

consciousness or intellectual capabilities, it was only b e c a u s e those theorists

80 Chapter HI Learning and Conditioning

h a d b e e n u n a b l e t o p i n p o i n t t h e r e i n f o r c e r s t h a t h a d c r e a t e d a n d were main-

taining t h e behavior. If this feels like a r a t h e r e x t r e m e position to you, r e -

m e m b e r t h a t Skinner's position was called radical behaviorism a n d was always

s u r r o u n d e d by controversy.

S k i n n e r often m e t skepticism a n d d e f e n d e d his views by d e m o n s t r a t i n g

e x p e r i m e n t a l l y that behaviors c o n s i d e r e d t o b e t h e sole p r o p e r t y o f h u m a n s

c o u l d be l e a r n e d by "lowly c r e a t u r e s " such as p i g e o n s or rats. O n e of these

d e m o n s t r a t i o n s involved t h e c o n t e n t i o n by o t h e r s that superstitious behavior

is uniquely h u m a n . T h e a r g u m e n t was that superstition r e q u i r e s h u m a n

cognitive activity (i.e., thinking, knowing, r e a s o n i n g ) . A superstition is a belief

in s o m e t h i n g , a n d we do n o t usually attribute such beliefs to animals. Skinner

said in e s s e n c e that superstitious behavior c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d as easily as any

o t h e r a c t i o n b y using t h e principles o f o p e r a n t conditioning. H e p e r f o r m e d

this e x p e r i m e n t to p r o v e it.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

T h i n k b a c k to a time w h e n you have behaved superstitiously. Did you knock

on w o o d , avoid walking u n d e r a ladder, avoid stepping on c r a c k s , c a r r y a lucky

c o i n or o t h e r c h a r m , shake the dice a c e r t a i n way in a b o a r d g a m e , or c h a n g e

y o u r behavior b e c a u s e of y o u r h o r o s c o p e ? It is probably safe to say that every-

o n e has d o n e s o m e t h i n g superstitious a t s o m e t i m e , even i f s o m e o f t h e m

m i g h t n o t want to a d m i t it. Skinner said that t h e reason p e o p l e do this is that

they believe or p r e s u m e a c o n n e c t i o n exists between t h e superstitious behav-

ior in a c e r t a i n setting a n d a r e i n f o r c i n g c o n s e q u e n c e , even t h o u g h , in reality,

it d o e s not. This c o n n e c t i o n exists b e c a u s e t h e behavior (such as shaking t h e

d i c e t h a t c e r t a i n way) was accidentally r e i n f o r c e d (by s o m e t h i n g rewarding,

s u c h as a g o o d roll) o n c e , twice, or several times. Skinner called this

noncontingent r e i n f o r c e m e n t — t h a t is, a reward that is n o t c o n t i n g e n t on any

p a r t i c u l a r behavior. You believe that t h e r e is a causal relationship between the

b e h a v i o r a n d t h e reward, when no such relationship exists. "If you think this is

s o m e exclusive h u m a n activity," Skinner m i g h t have said, "I'll c r e a t e a super-

stitious pigeon!"

M E T H O D

To u n d e r s t a n d t h e m e t h o d used in this e x p e r i m e n t , a brief description of what

has b e c o m e known as t h e Skinner B o x is necessary. T h e principle behind t h e

Skinner B o x ( o r conditioning chamber, as Skinner called it) is really quite simple.

It consists of a c a g e or b o x that is e m p t y e x c e p t for a dish or tray into which

food may be dispensed. This allows a r e s e a r c h e r to have c o n t r o l over when the

a n i m a l receives r e i n f o r c e m e n t , such as pellets of food. T h e early conditioning

b o x e s also c o n t a i n e d a lever which, if pressed, would cause s o m e food to be dis-

p e n s e d . If a rat (rats w e r e used in Skinner's earliest work) was p l a c e d in o n e of

these b o x e s , it would eventually, t h r o u g h trial a n d e r r o r , a n d r e i n f o r c e m e n t ,

l e a r n to press t h e lever for food. Alternatively, t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r could, if

Reading 11 Knock Wood! 81

desired, take c o n t r o l of t h e food dispenser a n d r e i n f o r c e a specific behavior.

Later, Skinner a n d o t h e r s found that pigeons also m a d e ideal subjects in c o n -

ditioning e x p e r i m e n t s , a n d conditioning c h a m b e r s were designed with disks to

be p e c k e d instead of bars to be pressed.

T h e s e c o n d i t i o n i n g cages were used in t h e study discussed h e r e , but

with o n e i m p o r t a n t c h a n g e . To study superstitious behavior, t h e food dis-

pensers were rigged to d r o p food pellets into t h e tray at intervals of 15 sec-

onds, regardless of what t h e animal was d o i n g at t h e time. T h e reward was n o t

c o n t i n g e n t on any p a r t i c u l a r behavior. This was n o n c o n t i n g e n t r e i n f o r c e -

m e n t : t h e animal r e c e i v e d a reward every 15 s e c o n d s , no m a t t e r what it did.

Subjects in this study w e r e 8 pigeons. T h e s e birds w e r e fed less t h a n t h e i r

n o r m a l daily a m o u n t for several days so that when tested they would be h u n -

g r y a n d t h e r e f o r e motivated to p e r f o r m behaviors for food (this i n c r e a s e d t h e

power o f t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t ) . E a c h p i g e o n was p l a c e d into t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l

c a g e for a few m i n u t e s e a c h day a n d j u s t left t h e r e to do whatever a p i g e o n

does. During this time, r e i n f o r c e m e n t was being delivered automatically every

15 seconds. After several days of c o n d i t i o n i n g in this way, two i n d e p e n d e n t ob-

servers r e c o r d e d the birds' behavior in t h e c a g e .

R E S U L T S

As Skinner r e p o r t s :

In six out of eight cases the resulting responses were so clearly defined that two observers could agree perfectly in counting instances. One bird was conditioned to turn counterclockwise about the cage, making two or three turns between re- inforcements. Another repeatedly thrust its head into one of the upper corners of the cage. A third developed a tossing response as if placing its head beneath an invisible bar and lifting it repeatedly. Two birds developed a pendulum mo- tion of the head and body in which the head was extended forward and swung from right to left with a sharp movement followed by a somewhat slower return. The body generally followed the movement and a few steps might be taken when it was extensive. Another bird was conditioned to make incomplete pecking or brushing movements directed toward but not touching the floor, (p. 168)

N o n e of these behaviors h a d b e e n o b s e r v e d in t h e birds p r i o r to t h e c o n d i -

tioning p r o c e d u r e . T h e new behaviors h a d n o real effect o n t h e delivery o f

food. Nevertheless, t h e pigeons behaved as if a c e r t a i n a c t i o n would p r o d u c e

t h e f o o d — t h a t is, they b e c a m e superstitious.

Skinner n e x t wanted to see what would h a p p e n if t h e time interval be-

tween r e i n f o r c e m e n t s was e x t e n d e d . W i t h o n e o f t h e head-bobbing a n d h o p -

ping birds, t h e interval between e a c h delivery of food pellets was slowly

i n c r e a s e d t o 1 m i n u t e . W h e n this o c c u r r e d , t h e pigeon's m o v e m e n t s b e c a m e

m o r e e n e r g e t i c until finally t h e b o b b i n g a n d h o p p i n g b e c a m e s o p r o n o u n c e d

that it a p p e a r e d t h e bird was p e r f o r m i n g a kind of d a n c e d u r i n g t h e m i n u t e

between r e i n f o r c e m e n t (such as a pigeon food dance).

T h e birds' new behavior was t h e n p ut o n e x t i n c t i o n . This m e a n t t h a t t h e

r e i n f o r c e m e n t in t h e test c a g e was d i s c o n t i n u e d . W h e n this h a p p e n e d , t h e

82 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

superstitious behaviors gradually d e c r e a s e d until they d i s a p p e a r e d altogether.

However, in t h e case of t h e hopping p i g e o n with a r e i n f o r c e m e n t interval t h a t

h a d b e e n i n c r e a s e d t o a m i n u t e , o v e r 1 0 , 0 0 0 responses w e r e r e c o r d e d before

e x t i n c t i o n o c c u r r e d !

D I S C U S S I O N

In this study, Skinner e n d e d up with six superstitious pigeons. However, he ex-

plains his findings m o r e carefully a n d modestly: ' T h e e x p e r i m e n t m i g h t b e

said to d e m o n s t r a t e a sort of superstition. T h e bird behaves as if t h e r e were a

causal relation between its behavior a n d t h e p r e s e n t a t i o n of food, a l t h o u g h

such a relation is lacking" ( p . 1 7 1 ) .

T h e n e x t step would b e t o apply these findings t o h u m a n s . You c a n

p r o b a b l y think o f a n a l o g i e s i n h u m a n behavior, a n d s o did Skinner. H e d e -

s c r i b e d "the bowler w h o has r e l e a s e d a ball down t h e alley but c o n t i n u e s to

b e h a v e as if he w e r e c o n t r o l l i n g it by twisting a n d t u r n i n g his a r m a n d shoul-

d e r a s a n o t h e r c a s e i n point" ( p . 1 7 1 ) . You know, rationally, t h a t behaviors

s u c h as these d o n ' t really have any effect on a bowling ball that is a l r e a d y

halfway down t h e alley. However, d u e to past c o n d i t i o n i n g , you believe y o u r

a n t i c s m a y h e l p , b u t t h e ball, in reality, will go w h e r e v e r it is g o i n g to go r e -

g a r d l e s s of y o u r b e h a v i o r after it has b e e n r e l e a s e d . As S k i n n e r p u t it, t h e

"bowler's b e h a v i o r h a s n o effect o n t h e ball, but t h e b e h a v i o r o f t h e ball has

a n effect o n t h e bowler" ( p . 1 7 1 ) . I n o t h e r words, o n s o m e o c c a s i o n s , t h e

ball m i g h t h a p p e n t o m o v e i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e bowler's body m o v e -

m e n t s . T h a t m o v e m e n t o f t h e ball, c o u p l e d with t h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f a strike

or a s p a r e , is e n o u g h to a c c i d e n t a l l y r e i n f o r c e t h e twisting a n d t u r n i n g be-

h a v i o r a n d m a i n t a i n t h e superstition. H o w different i s t h a t f r o m Skinner's

p i g e o n s ? N o t very.

T h e r e a s o n t h a t superstitions a r e s o resistant t o e x t i n c t i o n was d e m o n -

strated by t h e p i g e o n t h a t h o p p e d 1 0 , 0 0 0 times b e f o r e giving up t h e behavior.

W h e n any b e h a v i o r is only r e i n f o r c e d o n c e in a while in a given situation

(called partial reinforcement), it b e c o m e s very difficult to extinguish. This is be-

c a u s e t h e e x p e c t a t i o n stays high t h a t t h e superstitious behavior might work to

p r o d u c e t h e r e i n f o r c i n g c o n s e q u e n c e s . You c a n i m a g i n e that i f t h e c o n n e c -

tion was p r e s e n t every time a n d t h e n d i s a p p e a r e d , t h e b e h a v i o r would stop

quickly. However, in real life, t h e instances of a c c i d e n t a l r e i n f o r c e m e n t usu-

ally o c c u r sporadically, so the superstitious behavior often may persist for a

lifetime.

C R I T I C I S M S A N D S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H

Skinner's behaviorist t h e o r i e s a n d r e s e a r c h have always b e e n t h e subject of

g r e a t a n d s o m e t i m e s h e a t e d controversy. O t h e r p r o m i n e n t t h e o r e t i c a l ap-

p r o a c h e s to h u m a n behavior have a r g u e d that the strict behavioral view is un-

able t o a c c o u n t for m a n y o f the psychological processes that a r e f u n d a m e n t a l

Reading 11 Knock Wood! 83

to h u m a n s . Carl R o g e r s , t h e f o u n d e r of t h e humanistic s c h o o l of psychology,

a n d well known for his d e b a t e s with Skinner, s u m m e d up this criticism:

In this world of inner meanings, humanistic psychology can investigate issues which are meaningless for the behaviorist: purposes, goals, values, choice, per- ceptions of self, perceptions of others, the personal constructs with which we build our world . . . the whole phenomenal world of the individual with its con- nective tissue of meaning. Not one aspect of this world is open to the strict be- haviorist. Yet that these elements have significance for man's behavior seems certainly true. (Rogers, 1964, p. 119)

Behaviorists would a r g u e in t u r n t h a t all of these h u m a n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

a r e o p e n to behavioral analysis. T h e key to this analysis is a p r o p e r i n t e r p r e t a -

tion o f t h e behaviors a n d c o n s e q u e n c e s t h a t c o n s t i t u t e t h e m . ( S e e Skinner,

1 9 7 4 , for a c o m p l e t e discussion of these issues.)

On t h e specific issue of superstitions, however, t h e r e a p p e a r s to be less

controversy a n d a r a t h e r wide a c c e p t a n c e of t h e l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s e s involved

i n their f o r m a t i o n . A n e x p e r i m e n t p e r f o r m e d b y B r u n e r a n d Revuski ( 1 9 6 1 )

d e m o n s t r a t e d how easily superstitious b e h a v i o r develops in h u m a n s . F o u r

high school students e a c h sat in f r o n t of four t e l e g r a p h keys. T h e y w e r e told

that e a c h time they pressed t h e c o r r e c t key, a bell would s o u n d , a r e d light

would flash, a n d they would e a r n 5 c e n t s (worth a b o u t 5 0 c e n t s t o d a y ) . T h e

c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e was key n u m b e r 3. However, as in Skinner's study, key n u m -

b e r 3 would p r o d u c e t h e desired r e i n f o r c e m e n t ( t h e nickel) only after a delay

interval of 10 seconds. During this interval, t h e students would try o t h e r keys

in various c o m b i n a t i o n s . T h e n , at s o m e point following t h e delay, they would

receive t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t . T h e results were t h e s a m e for all t h e students.

After a while, they h a d e a c h d e v e l o p e d a p a t t e r n of key responses (such as 1,

2, 4, 3, 1, 2, 4, 3) t h a t they r e p e a t e d o v e r a n d over between e a c h r e i n f o r c e -

m e n t . Pressing t h e 3 key was t h e only r e i n f o r c e d behavior; t h e o t h e r presses in

t h e s e q u e n c e were c o m p l e t e l y superstitious. N o t only did they b e h a v e super-

stitiously, but all t h e students believed t h a t t h e o t h e r key presses were neces-

sary to "set up" t h e r e i n f o r c e d key. T h e y were c o m p l e t e l y u n a w a r e of t h e i r

superstitious behavior.

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Skinner, as o n e of psychology's m o s t influential figures, still has a far-reaching

substantive i m p a c t on scientific literature in m a n y fields. His 1 9 4 8 article on

superstitious behavior is cited in n u m e r o u s studies every year. O n e of these

studies, for e x a m p l e , c o m p a r e d two types of r e i n f o r c e m e n t in t h e develop-

m e n t of superstitious behavior ( A e s c h l e m a n , R o s e n , & Williams, 2 0 0 3 ) . Posi-

tive r e i n f o r c e m e n t o c c u r s when you receive s o m e t h i n g desirable as a

c o n s e q u e n c e (such a s money, food, o r p r a i s e ) . Negative r e i n f o r c e m e n t , which

is often confused with p u n i s h m e n t , rewards you by eliminating s o m e t h i n g

undesirable (such as n o t having to do h o m e w o r k or avoiding p a i n ) . T h e study

found that g r e a t e r levels of superstitious behavior (perceived c o n t r o l over n o n -

c o n t i n g e n t events) developed u n d e r conditions o f negative r e i n f o r c e m e n t

84 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

t h a n u n d e r positive r e i n f o r c e m e n t . In t h e a u t h o r s ' words: ' T h e s e findings . . .

suggest that, relative to positive r e i n f o r c e m e n t , negative r e i n f o r c e m e n t o p e r a -

tions may provide a m o r e fertile c o n d i t i o n for t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d mainte-

n a n c e o f superstitious behaviors" ( p . 3 7 ) . I n o t h e r words, t h e study suggested

t h a t you a r e m o r e likely to e m p l o y superstitious tactics to p r e v e n t bad out-

c o m e s t h a n t o c r e a t e g o o d o u t c o m e s .

A n o t h e r thought-provoking article citing Skinner's 1 9 4 8 study (Sagvolden

e t al., 1 9 9 8 ) e x a m i n e d t h e r o l e o f r e i n f o r c e m e n t i n a t t e n t i o n d e f i c i t / h y p e r a c -

tivity d i s o r d e r ( A D H D ) . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s asked boys with a n d without a diag-

nosis of A D H D to p a r t i c i p a t e in a g a m e in which they would receive rewards

o f c o i n s o r small toys. A l t h o u g h t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t was d e l i v e r e d a t f i x e d

3 0 - s e c o n d intervals ( n o n c o n t i n g e n t r e i n f o r c e m e n t ) , all t h e boys developed

superstitious behaviors that they believed were r e l a t e d to t h e rewards. In t h e

n e x t p h a s e of t h e study, t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t was d i s c o n t i n u e d . You would ex-

p e c t this to c a u s e a d e c r e a s e a n d cessation of whatever behaviors h a d b e e n

c o n d i t i o n e d ( e x t i n c t i o n ) . This is exactly what h a p p e n e d with t h e boys without

A D H D . B u t t h e boys with A D H D , after a b r i e f pause, b e c a m e m o r e active a n d

b e g a n e n g a g i n g impulsively in bursts of responses at an even faster p a c e , as if

t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t h a d b e e n reestablished. T h e a u t h o r s suggested that this

overactivity a n d impulsiveness implied that t h e boys with A D H D possessed sig-

nificantly less ability to c o p e with delays of r e i n f o r c e m e n t than did t h e c o m -

parison g r o u p o f boys. Findings such a s these a r e i m p o r t a n t additions t o o u r

u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d o u r ability to t r e a t A D H D effectively.

C O N C L U S I O N

Superstitions a r e everywhere. You probably have s o m e , a n d you surely know

o t h e r s w h o have t h e m . S o m e superstitions a r e such a p a r t of a c u l t u r e that

they p r o d u c e society-wide effects. You may be aware that m o s t high-rise build-

ings do n o t have a 1 3 t h floor. B u t that's n o t exactly t r u e . Obviously, a 13th

floor exists, but no floor is labeled "13." This is probably n o t b e c a u s e a r c h i t e c t s

a n d builders a r e an overly superstitious b u n c h , but r a t h e r it is d u e to the diffi-

culty of r e n t i n g or selling s p a c e on t h e "unlucky" t h i r t e e n t h floor. A n o t h e r ex-

a m p l e is t h a t A m e r i c a n s a r e so superstitious a b o u t t h e two-dollar bill that t h e

U.S. T r e a s u r y prints fewer two-dollar n o t e s than any o t h e r d e n o m i n a t i o n (less

t h a n 1 % ) .

A r e superstitions psychologically unhealthy? Most psychologists believe

t h a t even t h o u g h superstitious behaviors, by definition, do n o t p r o d u c e t h e

c o n s e q u e n c e s that you think they d o , they can serve useful functions. Often

such behaviors c a n p r o d u c e a feeling of strength a n d c o n t r o l when a p e r s o n is

facing a difficult situation. It is interesting to n o t e that p e o p l e w h o a r e em-

ployed i n d a n g e r o u s o c c u p a t i o n s t e n d t o have m o r e superstitions t h a n o t h e r s .

T h i s feeling of i n c r e a s e d p o w e r a n d c o n t r o l that is s o m e t i m e s c r e a t e d by su-

perstitious behavior c a n lead to r e d u c e d anxiety, g r e a t e r c o n f i d e n c e a n d as-

s u r a n c e , a n d i m p r o v e d p e r f o r m a n c e .

Reading 12 See Aggression . . . Do Aggression! 85

Aeschleman, S., Rosen, C, & Williams, M. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . The effect of non-contingent negative and pos- itive reinforcement operations on the acquisition of superstitious behaviors. Behavioural Processes, 61, 3 7 - 4 5 .

Bruner, A., & Revuski, S. ( 1 9 6 1 ) . Collateral behavior in humans. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 4, 3 4 9 - 3 5 0 .

Rogers, C. R. ( 1 9 6 4 ) . Toward a science of the person. In F. W. Wann ( E d . ) , Behaviorism and phe- nomenology: Contrasting bases for modern psychology. Chicago: Phoenix Books.

Sagvolden, T., Aase, H., Zeiner, P., & Berger, D. ( 1 9 9 8 ) . Altered reinforcement mechanisms in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Behavioral Brain Research, 9 4 ( 1 ) , 6 1 - 7 1 .

Schneider, S., & Morris, E. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . The history of the term radical behaviorism: From Watson to Skinner. Behavior Analyst, 10(1), 2 7 - 3 9 .

Skinner, B. F. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . About behaviorism. New York: Knopf.

Reading 12: S E E AGGRESSION . . . DO AGGRESSION! Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through

imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,

63, 575-582.

Aggression, in its a b u n d a n c e of forms, is arguably the greatest social p r o b l e m fac-

ing this c o u n t r y and the world today. It is also o n e of the most r e s e a r c h e d topics

in the history of psychology. Over the years, the behavioral scientists who have

been in the forefront of this research have been social psychologists, whose focus

is on all types of h u m a n interaction. O n e goal of social psychologists has been to

define aggression. This may, at first glance, seem like a relatively easy goal, but

such a definition turns out to be r a t h e r elusive. F o r e x a m p l e , which of t h e fol-

lowing behaviors would you define as aggression: a boxing m a t c h ? a cat killing a

mouse? a soldier shooting an enemy? setting rat traps in your basement? a bull-

fight? T h e list of behaviors that may or may n o t be included in a definition of ag-

gression is endless. As a result, if you were to consult 10 different social

psychologists, you would probably h e a r 10 different definitions of aggression.

Many r e s e a r c h e r s have g o n e beyond trying to a g r e e on a definition to t h e

m o r e i m p o r t a n t process o f e x a m i n i n g the sources o f h u m a n aggression. T h e

question they often pose is this: W h y do p e o p l e e n g a g e in acts of aggression?

T h r o u g h o u t the history of psychology, m a n y theoretical a p p r o a c h e s have b e e n

p r o p o s e d t o explain the causes o f aggression. S o m e o f these c o n t e n d that you

a r e biologically p r e p r o g r a m m e d to be aggressive b e c a u s e aggression in c e r t a i n

c i r c u m s t a n c e s has b e e n an evolutionary survival m e c h a n i s m . O t h e r t h e o r i e s

look to situational factors, such as r e p e a t e d frustration or specific types of

provocation, as t h e d e t e r m i n a n t s of aggressive responses. A third view, a n d t h e

o n e this study suggests, is that aggression is l e a r n e d .

O n e o f t h e m o s t famous a n d influential e x p e r i m e n t s ever c o n d u c t e d i n

the history of psychology d e m o n s t r a t e d how c h i l d r e n may learn to be aggres-

sive. This study, by Albert B a n d u r a a n d his associates D o r o t h e a Ross a n d

Sheila Ross, was c a r r i e d o u t in 1 9 6 1 at Stanford University. B a n d u r a is consid-

e r e d t o b e o n e o f t h e f o u n d e r s o f a school o f psychological t h o u g h t called

social learning theory. Social l e a r n i n g theorists p r o p o s e t h a t h u m a n i n t e r a c t i o n

86 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

i s t h e p r i m a r y f a c t o r i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f h u m a n personality. F o r e x a m p l e ,

as you a r e growing u p , i m p o r t a n t p e o p l e , such as y o u r p a r e n t s a n d t e a c h e r s ,

r e i n f o r c e c e r t a i n behaviors a n d i g n o r e o r punish o t h e r s . E v e n b e y o n d d i r e c t

rewards a n d p u n i s h m e n t s , however, B a n d u r a believed that behavior c a n b e

s h a p e d in i m p o r t a n t ways t h r o u g h simply observing a n d imitating t h e behav-

i o r of o t h e r s — t h a t is, t h r o u g h m o d e l i n g .

As you c a n see f r o m t h e title of this c h a p t e r ' s study, B a n d u r a , Ross, a n d

Ross w e r e able to d e m o n s t r a t e this m o d e l i n g effect for acts of aggression. This

r e s e a r c h has c o m e t o b e known t h r o u g h o u t t h e f i e l d o f psychology a s "the

B o b o doll study," for r e a s o n s that will b e c o m e c l e a r shortly. T h e article b e g a n

with a r e f e r e n c e to e a r l i e r r e s e a r c h findings d e m o n s t r a t i n g that c h i l d r e n

readily o b s e r v e d a n d imitated t h e b e h a v i o r o f adult models. O n e o f t h e issues

B a n d u r a wanted to e x a m i n e in this study was w h e t h e r such imitative learning

would generalize to settings in which t h e child was s e p a r a t e d f r o m t h e m o d e l

after observing t h e m o d e l ' s behavior.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

T h e researchers proposed to e x p o s e children to adult models who behaved in ei-

t h e r aggressive or nonaggressive ways. T h e children would t h e n be tested in a

new situation without t h e m o d e l present to d e t e r m i n e to what e x t e n t they would

imitate the acts of aggression they h a d observed in the adult. Based on this ex-

perimental manipulation, B a n d u r a a n d his associates offered four predictions:

1. C h i l d r e n who o b s e r v e d adult m o d e l s p e r f o r m i n g acts of aggression

would imitate t h e adult a n d e n g a g e in similar aggressive behaviors, even

if t h e m o d e l was no l o n g e r p r e s e n t . F u r t h e r m o r e , this behavior would

differ significantly f r o m those c h i l d r e n who o b s e r v e d nonaggressive

m o d e l s o r n o m o d e l s a t all.

2 . C h i l d r e n w h o w e r e e x p o s e d t o t h e nonaggressive m o d e l s would n o t only

be less aggressive t h a n those w h o o b s e r v e d t h e aggression b u t also sig-

nificantly less aggressive t h a n a c o n t r o l g r o u p of c h i l d r e n who were ex-

p o s e d to no m o d e l at all. In o t h e r words, t h e nonaggressive models

would have an aggression-inhibiting effect.

3 . B e c a u s e c h i l d r e n t e n d t o identify with p a r e n t s a n d o t h e r adults o f their

s a m e sex, p a r t i c i p a n t s would "imitate t h e behavior of t h e same-sex

m o d e l to a g r e a t e r d e g r e e t h a n a m o d e l of t h e o p p o s i t e sex." (p. 5 7 5 )

4. "Since aggression is a highly masculine-typed behavior in society, boys

should be m o r e p r e d i s p o s e d t h a n girls toward imitating aggression, t h e

difference being m o s t m a r k e d for subjects e x p o s e d t o t h e m a l e model."

( p . 5 7 5 )

M E T H O D

This article outlined t h e m e t h o d s used in t h e e x p e r i m e n t with g r e a t organiza-

t i o n a n d clarity. A l t h o u g h somewhat s u m m a r i z e d a n d simplified h e r e , these

m e t h o d o l o g i c a l steps were as follows.

Reading 12 See Aggression . . . Do Aggression! 87

Participants

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s enlisted the help o f the d i r e c t o r a n d h e a d t e a c h e r o f t h e Stan-

ford University Nursery School in o r d e r to obtain participants for their study. A

total of 36 boys a n d 36 girls, ranging in age from 3 years to almost 6 years, par-

ticipated in the study. T h e average a g e of the children was 4 years a n d 4 m o n t h s .

Experimental Conditions

T h e c o n t r o l g r o u p , consisting o f 2 4 children, would n o t b e e x p o s e d t o any

model. T h e remaining 48 children were first divided into two groups: o n e ex-

posed to aggressive models a n d the o t h e r e x p o s e d to nonaggressive models.

T h e s e groups were divided again into males a n d females. E a c h of these g r o u p s

was further divided so that half of t h e children were e x p o s e d to same-sex m o d -

els a n d half to opposite-sex models. This c r e a t e d a total of eight e x p e r i m e n t a l

groups a n d o n e c o n t r o l g r o u p . A question you might be asking yourself is this:

W h a t if the children in s o m e of the g r o u p s a r e already m o r e aggressive than

others? Due to the small n u m b e r of participants in e a c h g r o u p , B a n d u r a

g u a r d e d against this potential p r o b l e m by obtaining ratings of e a c h child's level

of aggressiveness. T h e children were r a t e d by an e x p e r i m e n t e r a n d a t e a c h e r

(both of w h o m knew the children well) on their levels of physical aggression,

verbal aggression, a n d aggression toward objects. T h e s e ratings allowed t h e r e -

searchers to m a t c h all t h e groups in t e r m s of average aggression level.

T h e Experimental Procedure

E a c h child was e x p o s e d individually to t h e various e x p e r i m e n t a l p r o c e d u r e s .

First, t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r b r o u g h t t h e child to t h e p l a y r o o m . On t h e way, they

e n c o u n t e r e d t h e adult m o d e l w h o was invited b y t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r t o c o m e

a n d join in the game. T h e child was seated in o n e c o r n e r of t h e p l a y r o o m at a

table c o n t a i n i n g highly interesting activities. T h e r e were p o t a t o prints (this

was 1 9 6 1 , so for those of you who have grown up in o u r high-tech a g e , a

p o t a t o print is a p o t a t o c u t in h a l f a n d c a r v e d so that, like a r u b b e r s t a m p , it

will r e p r o d u c e g e o m e t r i c shapes w h e n inked on a s t a m p p a d ) a n d stickers of

brightly c o l o r e d animals a n d flowers that c o u l d be pasted o n t o a poster. N e x t ,

t h e adult m o d e l was taken to a table in a different c o r n e r c o n t a i n i n g a Tin-

kertoy set, a mallet, a n d an inflated 5-foot-tall B o b o doll ( o n e of t h o s e l a r g e ,

inflatable clowns, weighted at t h e b o t t o m so it p o p s back up w h e n p u n c h e d or

kicked.). T h e e x p e r i m e n t e r e x p l a i n e d that these toys were for t h e m o d e l t o

play with a n d t h e n left t h e r o o m .

F o r b o t h t h e aggressive a n d nonaggressive c o n d i t i o n s , t h e m o d e l b e g a n

assembling t h e tinker toys. However, in t h e aggressive c o n d i t i o n , after a

m i n u t e t h e m o d e l a t t a c k e d t h e B o b o doll with violence. F o r all t h e c h i l d r e n in

the aggressive c o n d i t i o n , t h e s e q u e n c e of aggressive acts p e r f o r m e d by t h e

m o d e l was identical:

The model laid Bobo on its side, sat on it, and punched it repeatedly in the nose. The model then raised the Bobo doll, picked up the mallet, and struck the doll on the head. Following the mallet aggression, the model tossed the doll up in

88 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

the air aggressively, and kicked it about the room. This sequence of physically aggressive acts was repeated three times, interspersed with verbally aggressive responses such as, "Sock him in the nose..., Hit him down..., Throw him in the air . . . , Kick him . . . , Pow . . . , " and two non-aggressive comments, "He keeps coming back for more" and "He sure is a tough fella." (p. 576)

All this t o o k a b o u t 10 minutes, after which t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r c a m e back into

t h e r o o m , said good-bye t o t h e m o d e l , a n d t o o k t h e child t o a n o t h e r g a m e

r o o m .

In t h e nonaggressive c o n d i t i o n , t h e m o d e l simply played quietly with t h e

Tinkertoys for t h e 1 0 - m i n u t e p e r i o d a n d completely i g n o r e d t h e B o b o doll.

B a n d u r a a n d his c o l l a b o r a t o r s were careful to e n s u r e that all e x p e r i m e n t a l

factors w e r e identical for all t h e g r o u p s e x c e p t for t h e factors being studied:

t h e aggressive versus nonaggressive m o d e l a n d t h e sex o f t h e m o d e l .

A r o u s a l of Anger or Frustration

Following t h e 1 0 - m i n u t e play p e r i o d , all c h i l d r e n f r o m t h e various conditions

w e r e taken to a n o t h e r r o o m t h a t c o n t a i n e d very attractive toys, such as a fire

e n g i n e ; a j e t fighter; a n d a c o m p l e t e doll set including w a r d r o b e , doll c a r -

riage, a n d so on. T h e r e s e a r c h e r s believed that in o r d e r to test for aggressive

responses, the children should be somewhat a n g e r e d or frustrated, which would

m a k e such behaviors m o r e likely to occur. To accomplish this, they allowed them

to begin playing with the attractive toys, but after a short time told them that the

toys in this r o o m were reserved for o t h e r children. They also told the children,

however, that they could play with s o m e o t h e r toys in the n e x t r o o m .

Test for Imitation of Aggression

T h e final e x p e r i m e n t a l r o o m was filled with b o t h aggressive a n d n o n a g g r e s -

sive toys. Aggressive toys i n c l u d e d a B o b o doll ( o f c o u r s e ) , a mallet, two d a r t

guns, a n d a t e t h e r ball with a face p a i n t e d on it. T h e nonaggressive toys in-

c l u d e d a t e a set, c r a y o n s a n d paper, a ball, two dolls, c a r s a n d trucks, a n d plas-

tic f a r m animals. E a c h child was allowed to play in this r o o m for 20 minutes.

D u r i n g this p e r i o d , j u d g e s b e h i n d a one-way m i r r o r r a t e d t h e child's behavior

o n several m e a s u r e s o f aggression.

Measures of Aggression

A total of eight different responses w e r e m e a s u r e d in t h e children's behavior.

In t h e interest of clarity, only t h e four m o s t revealing m e a s u r e s a r e s u m m a -

rized h e r e . First, all acts that imitated t h e physical aggression of t h e m o d e l

w e r e r e c o r d e d . T h e s e i n c l u d e d sitting on t h e B o b o doll, p u n c h i n g it in the

n o s e , hitting it with t h e mallet, kicking it, a n d throwing it into t h e air. S e c o n d ,

imitation of t h e m o d e l s ' verbal aggression was m e a s u r e d by c o u n t i n g t h e chil-

d r e n ' s repetition of t h e p h r a s e s "Sock him," "Hit h i m down," "Pow," a n d so

o n . T h i r d , o t h e r mallet aggression (e.g., hitting objects o t h e r than t h e doll

with t h e mallet) were r e c o r d e d . F o u r t h , nonimitative aggression was d o c u -

m e n t e d by tabulating all t h e c h i l d r e n ' s acts of physical a n d verbal aggression

t h a t h a d n o t b e e n p e r f o r m e d b y t h e adult m o d e l .

Reading 12 See Aggression . . . Do Aggression! 89

R E S U L T S

T h e f i n d i n g s f r o m these observations a r e s u m m a r i z e d i n Table 1 2 - 1 . I f you ex-

a m i n e t h e results carefully, you will discover that t h r e e of t h e four hypotheses

p r e s e n t e d by B a n d u r a , Ross, a n d Ross were s u p p o r t e d .

T h e c h i l d r e n w h o w e r e e x p o s e d t o t h e violent m o d e l s t e n d e d t o imitate

t h e e x a c t violent behaviors they o b s e r v e d . O n a v e r a g e w e r e 3 8 . 2 instances o f

imitatíve physical aggression for e a c h of t h e boys, as well as 1 2 . 7 for t h e girls

who h a d b e e n e x p o s e d to t h e aggressive m o d e l s . In addition, t h e m o d e l s ' ver-

bally aggressive behaviors were imitated an a v e r a g e of 17 times by t h e boys

a n d 1 5 . 7 times by t h e girls. T h e s e specific acts of physical a n d verbal aggres-

sion were virtually n e v e r o b s e r v e d in t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s e x p o s e d to t h e n o n a g -

gressive m o d e l s or in t h e c o n t r o l g r o u p that was n o t e x p o s e d to any m o d e l .

As you will recall, B a n d u r a a n d his associates p r e d i c t e d that nonaggressive

models would have a violence-inhibiting effect on t h e children. F o r this hypoth-

esis to be supported, the results should show that t h e children in the nonag-

gressive conditions averaged significandy fewer instances of violence than those

in the no-model c o n t r o l g r o u p . In Table 12-1, if you c o m p a r e the nonaggressive

m o d e l c o l u m n s with the c o n t r o l g r o u p averages, you will see that t h e findings

were mixed. F o r e x a m p l e , boys a n d girls who observed t h e nonaggressive m a l e

exhibited far less nonimitative mallet aggression than controls, but boys who ob-

served the nonaggressive female aggressed m o r e with the mallet than did the

boys in the c o n t r o l g r o u p . As the a u t h o r s readily admit, these results were so

TABLE 12-1 Average Number of Aggressive Responses from Children in Various Treatment Conditions

TYPE OF MODEL

NON- NON- TYPE OF AGGRESSIVE AGGRESSION MALE

AGGRESSIVE MALE

AGGRESSIVE FEMALE

AGGRESSIVE FEMALE

CONTROL GROUP

Imitative Physical Aggression Boys 25.8 1.5 12.4 0.2 1.2 Girls 7.2 0.0 5.5 2.5 2.0 Imitative verbal Aggression Boys 12.7 0.0 4.3 1.1 1.7 Girls 2.0 0.0 13.7 0.3 0.7 Mallet Aggression Boys 28.8 6.7 15.5 18.7 13.5 Girls 18.7 0.5 17.2 0.5 13.1 Nonimitative Aggression Boys 36.7 22.3 16.2 26.1 24.6 Girls 8.4 1.4 21.3 7.2 6.1

(Adapted from p. 579)

90 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

inconsistent in relation to t h e aggression-inhibiting effect of nonaggressive

models that they were inconclusive.

T h e p r e d i c t e d g e n d e r differences, however, were strongly s u p p o r t e d by

t h e d a t a in Table 1 2 - 1 . Clearly, boys' violent behavior was influenced m o r e by

t h e aggressive m a l e m o d e l than by t h e aggressive female m o d e l . T h e average

total n u m b e r of aggressive behaviors by boys was 1 0 4 when they h a d o b s e r v e d

a m a l e aggressive m o d e l , c o m p a r e d with 4 8 . 4 w h e n a female m o d e l h a d b e e n

o b s e r v e d . Girls, on t h e o t h e r h a n d , a l t h o u g h t h e i r scores were less consistent,

a v e r a g e d 5 7 . 7 violent behaviors in t h e aggressive female m o d e l c o n d i t i o n ,

c o m p a r e d with 3 6 . 3 w h e n they o b s e r v e d t h e m a l e m o d e l . T h e a u t h o r s p o i n t

o u t t h a t in same-sex aggressive c o n d i t i o n s , girls were m o r e likely to imitate

verbal aggression, while boys were m o r e inclined to imitate physical violence.

Boys w e r e significantly m o r e physically aggressive t h a n girls in nearly all

t h e c o n d i t i o n s . If all t h e instances of aggression in Table 12-1 a r e tallied, t h e

boys c o m m i t t e d 2 7 0 violent acts, c o m p a r e d with 1 2 8 c o m m i t t e d by t h e girls.

D I S C U S S I O N

B a n d u r a , Ross, a n d Ross c l a i m e d t h a t they h a d d e m o n s t r a t e d how specific

behaviors—in this c a s e , violent o n e s — c o u l d b e l e a r n e d t h r o u g h t h e p r o c e s s

o f o b s e r v a t i o n a n d imitation without any r e i n f o r c e m e n t p r o v i d e d t o e i t h e r

t h e m o d e l s o r t h e o b s e r v e r s . T h e y c o n c l u d e d t h a t c h i l d r e n ' s o b s e r v a t i o n o f

adults e n g a g i n g in these b e h a v i o r s sends a m e s s a g e to t h e child t h a t this

f o r m of v i o l e n c e is permissible, thus w e a k e n i n g t h e child's inhibitions

against a g g r e s s i o n . T h e c o n s e q u e n c e o f this o b s e r v e d v i o l e n c e , they c o n -

t e n d e d , is an i n c r e a s e d probability t h a t a child will r e s p o n d to future frustra-

tions with aggressive behavior.

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s also a d d r e s s e d t h e issue o f why t h e influence o f t h e

m a l e aggressive m o d e l on t h e boys was so m u c h s t r o n g e r t h a n t h e female ag-

gressive m o d e l was on t h e girls. T h e y e x p l a i n e d that in o u r c u l t u r e , as in most,

aggression is seen as m o r e typical of males than females. In o t h e r words, it is a

masculine-typed behavior. So, a m a n ' s m o d e l i n g of aggression c a r r i e d with it

t h e weight of social acceptability a n d was, t h e r e f o r e , m o r e powerful in its abil-

ity to influence t h e observer.

S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H

At t h e time this e x p e r i m e n t was c o n d u c t e d , the r e s e a r c h e r s probably h a d no

idea how influential it would b e c o m e . By the early 1 9 6 0 s , television h a d grown

into a powerful f o r c e in U.S. culture a n d c o n s u m e r s were b e c o m i n g c o n c e r n e d

a b o u t t h e effect of televised violence on children. This has b e e n a n d continues

to be hotly debated. In t h e past 30 years, no fewer t h a n t h r e e congressional

hearings have b e e n held on t h e subject of television violence, a n d the work of

B a n d u r a a n d o t h e r psychologists has b e e n included in these investigations.

T h e s e s a m e t h r e e r e s e a r c h e r s c o n d u c t e d a follow-up study 2 years later

that was i n t e n d e d to e x a m i n e t h e p o w e r of aggressive m o d e l s w h o a r e on film,

Reading 12 See Aggression . . . Do Aggression! 91

or w h o a r e n o t even real p e o p l e . Using a similar e x p e r i m e n t a l m e t h o d involv-

ing aggression toward a B o b o doll, B a n d u r a , Ross, a n d Ross designed an ex-

p e r i m e n t to c o m p a r e t h e influence of a live adult m o d e l with t h e s a m e m o d e l

on film a n d to a c a r t o o n version of t h e s a m e aggressive m o d e l i n g . T h e results

d e m o n s t r a t e d that t h e live adult m o d e l h a d a s t r o n g e r influence t h a n t h e

filmed adult, who, in t u r n , was m o r e influential t h a n t h e c a r t o o n . However, all

t h r e e forms o f aggressive m o d e l s p r o d u c e d significantly m o r e violent behav-

iors in t h e c h i l d r e n t h a n was o b s e r v e d in c h i l d r e n e x p o s e d to nonaggressive

m o d e l s o r c o n t r o l s ( B a n d u r a , Ross, & Ross, 1 9 6 3 ) .

On an optimistic n o t e , B a n d u r a found in a l a t e r study t h a t t h e effect of

m o d e l e d violence c o u l d be a l t e r e d u n d e r c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s . You will r e c a l l

that in his original study, no rewards w e r e given for aggression to e i t h e r t h e

models o r t h e c h i l d r e n . B u t what d o you suppose would h a p p e n i f t h e m o d e l

behaved violently a n d was t h e n e i t h e r r e i n f o r c e d or p u n i s h e d for t h e behav-

ior while t h e child was observing? B a n d u r a ( 1 9 6 5 ) tested this i d e a a n d f o u n d

that c h i l d r e n imitated t h e violence m o r e w h e n they saw it r e w a r d e d but sig-

nificantly less when t h e m o d e l was p u n i s h e d for aggressive behavior.

Critics of B a n d u r a ' s r e s e a r c h on aggression have p o i n t e d o u t that ag-

gressing toward an inflated doll is n o t t h e s a m e as attacking a n o t h e r p e r s o n ,

a n d c h i l d r e n know t h e difference. Building on t h e f o u n d a t i o n laid by B a n -

d u r a a n d his colleagues, o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s have e x a m i n e d t h e effect o f m o d -

eled violence on real aggression. In a study using B a n d u r a ' s B o b o doll

m e t h o d (Hanratty, O'Neil, & Sulzer, 1 9 7 2 ) , c h i l d r e n o b s e r v e d a violent adult

m o d e l a n d were t h e n e x p o s e d t o high levels o f frustration. W h e n this o c -

c u r r e d , they often aggressed against a live p e r s o n (dressed like a c l o w n ) ,

w h e t h e r that p e r s o n was the s o u r c e o f t h e frustration o r not.

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

B a n d u r a ' s r e s e a r c h discussed in this c h a p t e r m a d e at least two f u n d a m e n t a l

c o n t r i b u t i o n s to psychology. First, it d e m o n s t r a t e d dramatically how c h i l d r e n

c a n a c q u i r e new behaviors simply by observing adults, even w h e n t h e adults

a r e n o t physically present. Social l e a r n i n g theorists believe t h a t many, if n o t

most, o f t h e behaviors t h a t c o m p r i s e h u m a n personality a r e f o r m e d t h r o u g h

this m o d e l i n g process. S e c o n d , this r e s e a r c h f o r m e d t h e f o u n d a t i o n for hun-

dreds of studies over t h e past 45 years on t h e effects on c h i l d r e n of viewing vi-

o l e n c e in p e r s o n or in t h e m e d i a . ( F o r a s u m m a r y of B a n d u r a ' s life a n d

c o n t r i b u t i o n s to psychology, see Pajares, 2 0 0 4 ) . Less t h a n a d e c a d e a g o , t h e

U.S. C o n g r e s s held new h e a r i n g s o n m e d i a violence focusing o n t h e p o t e n t i a l

negative effects of children's e x p o s u r e to violence on TV, movies, video

g a m e s , c o m p u t e r g a m e s , a n d t h e I n t e r n e t . B r o a d c a s t e r s a n d m u l t i m e d i a de-

velopers, feeling i n c r e a s e d pressure to r e s p o n d to public a n d legislative at-

tacks, a r e working t o r e d u c e m e d i a violence o r p u t i n p l a c e p a r e n t a l advisory

rating systems warning of particularly violent c o n t e n t .

P e r h a p s of even g r e a t e r c o n c e r n is scientific e v i d e n c e d e m o n s t r a t i n g

that t h e effects o f violent m e d i a o n c h i l d r e n may c o n t i n u e into a d u l t h o o d

92 Chapter III Learning and Conditioning

(e.g., H u e s m a n n e t al., 2 0 0 3 ) . O n e study found "that c h i l d h o o d e x p o s u r e t o

m e d i a violence predicts y o u n g adult aggressive behavior for both males a n d

females. Identification with aggressive TV c h a r a c t e r s a n d p e r c e i v e d realism of

TV violence also p r e d i c t later aggression. T h e s e relations persist even when

t h e effects of s o c i o e c o n o m i c status, intellectual ability, a n d a variety of parent-

ing factors a r e c o n t r o l l e d " ( p . 2 0 1 ) .

C O N C L U S I O N

As c h i l d r e n a c q u i r e easier a c c e s s to quickly e x p a n d i n g m e d i a f o r m a t s , c o n -

c e r n s o v e r t h e effects of violence e m b e d d e d in these m e d i a a r e increasing as

well. Blocking children's access to all violent m e d i a is probably an impossible

task, but r e s e a r c h is increasing on strategies for preventing m e d i a violence

f r o m translating into real-life aggression a m o n g c h i l d r e n . T h e s e efforts have

b e e n s t e p p e d up considerably in t h e wake of deadly shootings by students at

schools t h r o u g h o u t t h e U n i t e d States, a n d they a r e likely t o c o n t i n u e o n m a n y

r e s e a r c h fronts for t h e foreseeable future. Recently, the California legislature

passed a law b a n n i n g t h e sale of "ultra-violent" video g a m e s to c h i l d r e n u n d e r

t h e a g e o f 1 8 without p a r e n t a l permission a n d imposing a f i n e o f $ 1 , 0 0 0 o n re-

tailers w h o fail to a d h e r e to t h e law. W h a t is "ultra-violent," you ask? A c c o r d i n g

to t h e law, it is defined "as depicting serious injury to h u m a n beings in a m a n -

n e r t h a t is especially h e i n o u s , a t r o c i o u s or c r u e l " (Going after video g a m e vio-

l e n c e , 2 0 0 6 ) . If you find such a definition overly subjective, you would n o t be

a l o n e . T h e video g a m e industry is suing to o v e r t u r n this law as unconstitu-

t i o n a l , a n d you c a n b e t that B a n d u r a ' s r e s e a r c h will b e p a r t o f that battle.

Bandura, A. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . Influence of models' reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imi- tative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, I, 5 8 9 - 5 9 5 .

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. ( 1 9 6 3 ) . Imitation of film mediated aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3 - 1 1 .

Going after video game violence. ( 2 0 0 6 ) . State Legislatures 32( 1),9. Hanratty, M., O'Neil, E., & Sulzer, J. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . The effect of frustration on the imitation of aggres-

sion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 21, 3 0 - 3 4 . http://webspace.ship.edu/ cgboer/bandura.html.

Huesmann, L. R., Moise.J., Podolski, C. P., & Eron, L. D. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Longitudinal relations between childhood exposure to media violence and adult aggression and violence: 1 9 7 7 - 1 9 9 2 . Developmental Psychology, 39(2), 2 0 1 - 2 2 1 .

Pajares, F. ( 2 0 0 4 ) . Albert Bandura: Biographical sketch. Retrieved March 10, 2 0 0 7 , from E m o r y University, Division of Education Studies Web site: http://des.emory.edu/mfp/ bandurabio.html

INTELLIGENCE, COGNITION, AND MEMORY

R e a d i n g 1 3 W H A T Y O U E X P E C T I S W H A T Y O U G E T

R e a d i n g 1 4 J U S T / - / C W A R E Y O U I N T E L L I G E N T ?

R e a d i n g 1 5 M A P S I N Y O U R M I N D

R e a d i n g 1 6 T H A N K S F O R T H E M E M O R I E S !

The b r a n c h of psychology m o s t c o n c e r n e d with t h e topics in this section is called cognitive psychology. Cognitive psychologists study h u m a n m e n t a l processes. O u r intelligence, o u r ability t o think a n d r e a s o n , a n d o u r ability t o

store a n d retrieve symbolic r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f o u r e x p e r i e n c e s all c o m b i n e t o

help m a k e h u m a n s different f r o m o t h e r animals. A n d , o f c o u r s e , these m e n -

tal processes g r e a d y affect o u r behavior. However, studying these p r o c e s s e s is

often m o r e difficult t h a n studying outward, observable behaviors, so a g r e a t

deal of r e s e a r c h creativity a n d ingenuity have b e e n necessary.

T h e studies i n c l u d e d h e r e have c h a n g e d t h e way psychologists view o u r

internal m e n t a l behavior. T h e first article discusses t h e f a m o u s "Pygmalion

study," which d e m o n s t r a t e d that n o t only p e r f o r m a n c e in s c h o o l , b u t actual

intelligence scores o f c h i l d r e n , c a n b e influenced b y t h e e x p e c t a t i o n s o f oth-

ers, such as t e a c h e r s . T h e s e c o n d r e a d i n g discusses a body of work that has

t r a n s f o r m e d how we define h u m a n intelligence. In t h e early 1 9 8 0 s H o w a r d

G a r d n e r p r o p o s e d that h u m a n s d o n o t possess o n e g e n e r a l intelligence but

r a t h e r at least seven distinct intelligences. His idea has b e c o m e widely known

as Multiple Intelligence (MI) Theory. T h i r d , we e n c o u n t e r an early g r o u n d b r e a k -

ing study in cognitive psychology t h a t e x a m i n e d how animals a n d h u m a n s

f o r m cognitive maps, which a r e their m e n t a l i m a g e s of t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a r o u n d

t h e m . F o u r t h , you will r e a d a b o u t r e s e a r c h t h a t revealed how o u r m e m o r i e s

a r e n o t nearly as a c c u r a t e as we think they a r e , as well as t h e implications of

this for eyewitness testimony in c o u r t a n d in psychotherapy.

Reading 13: WHAT YOU EXPECT IS WHAT YOU GET Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. (1966). Teachers' expectancies: Determinates of

pupils' IQ gains. Psychological Reports, 19, 115-118.

We a r e all familiar with the idea of the self-fulfilling prophecy. O n e way of de-

scribing this c o n c e p t is that if we expect s o m e t h i n g to h a p p e n in a c e r t a i n way,

93

94 Chapter IV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

o u r e x p e c t a t i o n will t e n d to m a k e it so. W h e t h e r self-fulfilling p r o p h e c i e s really

do o c c u r in a predictable way in everyday life is o p e n to scientific study, but psy-

c h o l o g i c a l r e s e a r c h has d e m o n s t r a t e d that in s o m e areas they a r e a reality.

T h e question of the self-fulfilling p r o p h e c y in scientific r e s e a r c h was first

b r o u g h t to t h e attention of psychologists in 1 9 1 1 in t h e famous case of "Clever

Hans," a horse owned by Wilhelm von Osten (Pfungst, 1 9 1 1 ) . Clever Hans was

famous for, ostensibly, being able to r e a d , spell, a n d solve m a t h problems by

stomping o u t answers with his front hoof. Naturally, many people were skepti-

cal, but when Hans's abilities were tested by a c o m m i t t e e of e x p e r t s at the time,

they were found to be genuinely p e r f o r m e d without p r o m p t i n g from von

Osten. But how could any h o r s e ( e x c e p t possibly Mr. Ed of 1 9 6 0 s TV c o m e d y

f a m e ) possess such a d e g r e e of h u m a n intelligence? A psychologist in the early

1 9 0 0 s , Oskar Pfungst, p e r f o r m e d a series of careful e x p e r i m e n t s a n d found that

H a n s was actually solving t h e p r o b l e m s but was receiving subde, unintentional

cues f r o m his questioners. F o r e x a m p l e , after asking a question, people would

look down at t h e horse's h o o f for t h e answer. As t h e horse a p p r o a c h e d t h e c o r -

r e c t n u m b e r of hoofbeats, t h e questioners would raise their eyes or h e a d very

slighdy in anticipation of the horse's c o m p l e t i n g its answer. T h e horse had been

c o n d i t i o n e d to use these subde m o v e m e n t s from t h e observers as signs to stop

stomping, a n d this usually resulted in the c o r r e c t answer to t h e question.

You m i g h t ask, how is a trick h o r s e r e l a t e d to psychological r e s e a r c h ?

T h e Clever H a n s findings p o i n t e d o u t t h e possibility that observers often have

specific e x p e c t a t i o n s o r biases that m a y cause t h e m t o t e l e g r a p h u n i n t e n -

tional signals to a p a r t i c i p a n t being studied. T h e s e signals, t h e n , may cause

t h e p a r t i c i p a n t to r e s p o n d in ways t h a t a r e consistent with t h e observers' bias

a n d , consequently, c o n f i r m their e x p e c t a t i o n s . W h a t all this finally boils down

to is t h a t an e x p e r i m e n t e r may think a c e r t a i n behavior results f r o m his or h e r

scientific t r e a t m e n t o f o n e p a r t i c i p a n t o r o n e g r o u p o f p a r t i c i p a n t s c o m p a r e d

with a n o t h e r . S o m e t i m e s , t h o u g h , t h e b e h a v i o r may result f r o m n o t h i n g m o r e

t h a n t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r ' s own biased e x p e c t a t i o n s . If this o c c u r s , it r e n d e r s t h e

e x p e r i m e n t invalid. T h i s t h r e a t to t h e validity of a psychological e x p e r i m e n t is

called t h e experimenter expectancy effect.

R o b e r t R o s e n t h a l , a leading r e s e a r c h e r on this m e t h o d o l o g i c a l issue,

d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r e x p e c t a n c y effect i n l a b o r a t o r y psychological

e x p e r i m e n t s . In o n e study ( R o s e n t h a l & F o d e , 1 9 6 3 ) , psychology students in a

c o u r s e a b o u t l e a r n i n g a n d c o n d i t i o n i n g unknowingly b e c a m e participants

themselves. S o m e of t h e students w e r e told they would be working with rats

that h a d b e e n specially b r e d for high intelligence, as m e a s u r e d by their ability

to l e a r n mazes quickly. T h e rest of t h e students w e r e told that they would be

working with rats b r e d for dullness in l e a r n i n g mazes. T h e students t h e n p r o -

c e e d e d to c o n d i t i o n t h e i r rats to p e r f o r m various skills, including m a z e learn-

ing. T h e students w h o h a d b e e n assigned t h e maze-bright rats r e c o r d e d

significantly faster l e a r n i n g times t h a n t h o s e r e p o r t e d by t h e students with the

maze-dull rats. In reality, t h e rats given to t h e students w e r e s t a n d a r d lab rats

a n d were r a n d o m l y assigned. T h e s e students w e r e n o t c h e a t i n g o r purpose-

Reading 13 What You Expect Is What You Get 95

fully slanting t h e i r results. T h e influences they e x e r t e d on t h e i r animals w e r e

apparently u n i n t e n t i o n a l a n d u n c o n s c i o u s .

A s a result o f this a n d o t h e r r e l a t e d r e s e a r c h , t h e t h r e a t o f e x p e r i m e n t e r

e x p e c t a n c i e s to scientific r e s e a r c h has b e e n well established. P r o p e r l y t r a i n e d

r e s e a r c h e r s , using careful p r o c e d u r e s (such as t h e double-blind m e t h o d , in

which t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r s w h o c o m e i n c o n t a c t with t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s a r e un-

aware o f the hypotheses o f t h e study) a r e usually able t o avoid m o s t o f these

e x p e c t a n c y effects.

B e y o n d this, however, R o s e n t h a l was c o n c e r n e d a b o u t how such biases

a n d e x p e c t a n c i e s m i g h t o c c u r outside t h e l a b o r a t o r y , s u c h as in s c h o o l class-

r o o m s . B e c a u s e t e a c h e r s in public schools may n o t have h a d t h e o p p o r t u n i t y

t o learn a b o u t t h e d a n g e r s o f e x p e c t a n c i e s , how g r e a t a n influence m i g h t this

t e n d e n c y have on t h e i r students' potential p e r f o r m a n c e ? After all, in t h e past,

t e a c h e r s have b e e n aware of students' IQ, s c o r e s b e g i n n i n g in first g r a d e .

Could this i n f o r m a t i o n set up biased e x p e c t a n c i e s in t h e t e a c h e r s ' m i n d s a n d

c a u s e t h e m to unintentionally t r e a t "bright" students (as j u d g e d by high intel-

ligence s c o r e s ) differently f r o m t h o s e seen as less bright? A n d if so, is this fair?

T h o s e questions f o r m e d t h e basis o f R o s e n t h a l a n d j a c o b s o n ' s study.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

Rosenthal labeled this e x p e c t a n c y effect, as it o c c u r s in n a t u r a l i n t e r p e r s o n a l

settings outside t h e laboratory, t h e Pygmalion effect. In t h e G r e e k myth, a sculp-

t o r (Pygmalion) falls in love with his sculpted c r e a t i o n of a w o m a n . Most p e o -

ple a r e m o r e familiar with t h e m o d e r n G e o r g e B e r n a r d Shaw play Pygmalion

(My Fair Lady is the musical version) a b o u t t h e blossoming of Eliza Doolittle

b e c a u s e o f t h e teaching, e n c o u r a g e m e n t , a n d expectations o f H e n r y Higgins.

Rosenthal suspected that when an e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l t e a c h e r is p r o v i d e d with

i n f o r m a t i o n that c r e a t e s c e r t a i n e x p e c t a n c i e s a b o u t students' potential ( s u c h

as intelligence s c o r e s ) , w h e t h e r s t r o n g or weak, t h e t e a c h e r m i g h t unknow-

ingly behave in ways that subtly e n c o u r a g e or facilitate t h e p e r f o r m a n c e of t h e

students seen as m o r e likely to s u c c e e d . This, in t u r n , would c r e a t e t h e self-

fulfilling p r o p h e c y of actually causing those students to e x c e l , p e r h a p s at t h e

e x p e n s e o f t h e students for w h o m lower e x p e c t a t i o n s exist. T o test these t h e o -

retical propositions, R o s e n t h a l a n d his c o l l e a g u e J a c o b s o n o b t a i n e d t h e assis-

t a n c e of an e l e m e n t a r y school (called O a k S c h o o l ) in a p r e d o m i n a n t l y lower

middle-class n e i g h b o r h o o d in a l a r g e town.

M E T H O D

With t h e c o o p e r a t i o n of t h e O a k S c h o o l administration, all t h e students in

G r a d e s 1 t h r o u g h 6 were given an intelligence test ( t h e Tests of G e n e r a l Abil- ity, or T O G A ) n e a r the beginning of t h e a c a d e m i c year. T h i s test was c h o s e n

b e c a u s e it was a nonverbal test for which a student's s c o r e did n o t d e p e n d pri-

marily u p o n s c h o o l - l e a r n e d skills of reading, writing, a n d a r i t h m e t i c . Also, it

was a test with which the t e a c h e r s in O a k School probably would n o t be familiar.

96 Chapter TV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

T h e t e a c h e r s were told that the students were being given the "Harvard Test

of Inflected Acquisition." This d e c e p t i o n was i m p o r t a n t in this case to c r e a t e

e x p e c t a n c i e s in the minds of t h e teachers, a necessary ingredient for the exper-

i m e n t to be successful. It was further explained to the t e a c h e r s that the H a r v a r d

Test was designed to serve as a p r e d i c t o r of a c a d e m i c blooming or spurting. In

o t h e r words, t e a c h e r s believed that students who s c o r e d high on the test were

ready to e n t e r a p e r i o d of increased learning abilities within the n e x t year. This

predictive ability of t h e test was also, in fact, n o t t r u e .

O a k S c h o o l offered t h r e e classes e a c h of G r a d e s 1 t h r o u g h 6. All of the

18 t e a c h e r s ( 1 6 w o m e n , 2 m e n ) for these classes were given a list of n a m e s of

students in t h e i r classes w h o h a d s c o r e d in t h e t o p 2 0 % on t h e H a r v a r d Test

a n d w e r e , t h e r e f o r e , identified a s potential a c a d e m i c b l o o m e r s d u r i n g the

a c a d e m i c year. B u t h e r e ' s t h e key to this study: t h e c h i l d r e n on t h e t e a c h e r s '

t o p 10 lists h a d b e e n assigned to this e x p e r i m e n t a l c o n d i t i o n purely at r a n -

d o m . T h e only difference between these c h i l d r e n a n d t h e o t h e r s ( t h e c o n -

trols) was t h a t they h a d b e e n identified to t h e i r t e a c h e r s as t h e o n e s who

would show unusual intellectual gains.

N e a r t h e e n d o f t h e s c h o o l year, all c h i l d r e n a t t h e school were m e a -

s u r e d again with t h e s a m e test ( t h e T O G A ) , a n d t h e d e g r e e o f c h a n g e i n I Q

was c a l c u l a t e d for e a c h child. T h e differences i n I Q c h a n g e s between the ex-

p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p a n d t h e c o n t r o l s c o u l d t h e n b e e x a m i n e d t o see i f t h e ex-

p e c t a n c y effect h a d b e e n c r e a t e d in a real-world setting.

R E S U L T S

F i g u r e 13-1 summarizes t h e results o f t h e c o m p a r i s o n s o f t h e I Q increases for

t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l versus t h e c o n t r o l groups. F o r t h e e n t i r e school, the children

for w h o m t h e t e a c h e r s h a d e x p e c t e d g r e a t e r intellectual growth averaged

significandy g r e a t e r i m p r o v e m e n t than did t h e c o n t r o l c h i l d r e n ( 1 2 . 2 a n d

3 0 r

First Second Third Fourth Fifth Sixth V / A Experimental group

Grade level (identified bloomers)

Reading 13 What You Expect Is What You Get 97

eo 70

I 60 - 1 FIGURE 13-2 Percentage

of 1st- and 2nd-grade stu- dents with major gains in IQ scores.

10 points 20 points Amount of gain

30 points

Control group Í / / J Experimental group

(identified btoomers)

8.2 points, respectively). However, if you e x a m i n e Figure 1 3 - 1 , it is c l e a r that

this difference was a c c o u n t e d for by the h u g e differences in G r a d e s 1 a n d 2.

Possible reasons for this a r e discussed shortly. Rosenthal a n d J a c o b s o n offered

a n o t h e r useful a n d revealing way to organize t h e d a t a for these 1st- a n d 2 n d -

g r a d e students. Figure .13-2 illustrates t h e p e r c e n t a g e of t h e c h i l d r e n in e a c h

g r o u p who o b t a i n e d increases i n I Q o f a t least 1 0 , 2 0 , o r 3 0 points.

Two major findings e m e r g e d from this study. First, the e x p e c t a n c y effect

previously demonstrated in laboratory settings also a p p e a r e d to function in less

experimental, real-world situations. Second, the effect was very strong in the early

grades, yet almost nonexistent for the older children. W h a t does all this m e a n ?

D I S C U S S I O N

As R o s e n t h a l suspected from his past r e s e a r c h , the t e a c h e r s ' e x p e c t a t i o n s of

their students' behavior b e c a m e a self-fulfilling prophecy. "When t e a c h e r s ex-

p e c t e d that c e r t a i n c h i l d r e n would show g r e a t e r intellectual d e v e l o p m e n t ,

those c h i l d r e n did show g r e a t e r intellectual development" ( R o s e n t h a l & J a -

c o b s o n , 1 9 6 8 , p . 8 5 ) . R e m e m b e r , t h e d a t a a r e averages o f t h r e e classes a n d

t h r e e t e a c h e r s for e a c h g r a d e level. It is difficult to think of e x p l a n a t i o n s for

t h e differences i n I Q gains o t h e r t h a n t h e t e a c h e r s ' e x p e c t a t i o n s .

However, R o s e n t h a l felt it was i m p o r t a n t to try to explain why t h e self-

fulfilling p r o p h e c y was n o t d e m o n s t r a t e d in t h e h i g h e r g r a d e levels. B o t h in

this article a n d in later writings, R o s e n t h a l a n d J a c o b s o n offered several possi-

ble reasons for their findings:

1 . Y o u n g e r c h i l d r e n a r e generally t h o u g h t o f a s m o r e malleable o r "trans-

f o r m a b l e . " If this is t r u e , t h e n t h e y o u n g e r c h i l d r e n in t h e study may

have e x p e r i e n c e d g r e a t e r c h a n g e simply b e c a u s e they were easier t h a n

the o l d e r c h i l d r e n to c h a n g e . R e l a t e d to this is t h e possibility t h a t even if

y o u n g e r c h i l d r e n a r e n o t m o r e malleable, t e a c h e r s may have believed t h a t

they were. This belief a l o n e may have b e e n e n o u g h to c r e a t e differential

t r e a t m e n t a n d p r o d u c e t h e results.

2. Y o u n g e r students in an e l e m e n t a r y school tend to have less well-established

reputations. In o t h e r words, if the teachers h a d n o t yet had a c h a n c e to

98 Chapter IV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

f o r m an o p i n i o n of a child's abilities, t h e e x p e c t a n c i e s c r e a t e d by the

r e s e a r c h e r s c o u l d have c a r r i e d m o r e weight.

3. Y o u n g e r c h i l d r e n may be m o r e easily influenced by a n d m o r e suscepti-

ble to t h e subtle a n d u n i n t e n t i o n a l processes that t e a c h e r s use to c o m -

m u n i c a t e p e r f o r m a n c e e x p e c t a t i o n s t o t h e m :

Under this interpretation, it is possible that teachers react to children of all grade levels in the same way if they believe them to be capable of intel- lectual gain. But perhaps it is only the younger children whose perfor- mance is affected by the special things the teacher says to them; the special ways in which she says them; the way she looks, postures, and touches the children from whom she expects greater intellectual growth, (p. 83)

4. T e a c h e r s in lower g r a d e s may differ f r o m u p p e r - g r a d e t e a c h e r s in ways

t h a t p r o d u c e g r e a t e r c o m m u n i c a t i o n o f t h e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s t o t h e chil-

d r e n . R o s e n t h a l a n d J a c o b s o n did n o t speculate as to e x a c t l y what these

differences m i g h t be if i n d e e d they exist.

S I G N I F I C A N C E O F F I N D I N G S A N D S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H

T h e real i m p o r t a n c e o f Rosenthal a n d J a c o b s o n ' s findings a t O a k School relates

to the potential long-lasting effects of teachers' expectations on the scholastic

p e r f o r m a n c e of students. This, in t u r n , feeds directly into o n e of the most con-

troversial topics in psychology's r e c e n t history: the question of t h e fairness of in-

telligence testing. Let's e x p l o r e s o m e later r e s e a r c h that e x a m i n e d t h e specific

ways in which t e a c h e r s may unconsciously c o m m u n i c a t e their h i g h e r e x p e c t a -

tions to those students w h o m they believe possess g r e a t e r potential.

A study c o n d u c t e d by C h a i k e n , Sigler, a n d D e r l e g a ( 1 9 7 4 ) involved

videotaping t e a c h e r - s t u d e n t i n t e r a c t i o n s in a c l a s s r o o m situation in which

t h e t e a c h e r s h a d b e e n i n f o r m e d t h a t c e r t a i n c h i l d r e n were e x t r e m e l y bright

( t h e s e "bright" students h a d actually b e e n c h o s e n at r a n d o m f r o m all t h e stu-

d e n t s in t h e class). Careful e x a m i n a t i o n of t h e videos indicated t h a t t e a c h e r s

favored t h e identified "brighter" students in m a n y subtle ways. T h e y smiled at

these students m o r e often, m a d e m o r e eye c o n t a c t , a n d h a d m o r e favorable

r e a c t i o n s to these students' c o m m e n t s in class. T h e s e r e s e a r c h e r s go on to re-

p o r t t h a t students for w h o m these high e x p e c t a t i o n s exist a r e m o r e likely to

enjoy school, r e c e i v e m o r e c o n s t r u c t i v e c o m m e n t s f r o m t e a c h e r s o n their mis-

takes, a n d work h a r d e r t o try t o i m p r o v e . W h a t this a n d o t h e r studies indicate

i s t h a t t e a c h e r e x p e c t a n c i e s c a n affect m o r e t h a n j u s t intelligence scores.

I m a g i n e for a m o m e n t that you a r e an e l e m e n t a r y s c h o o l t e a c h e r with a

class of 20 students. On t h e first day of class, you receive a class r o s t e r on

which is p r i n t e d t h e IQ s c o r e s for all y o u r students. You n o t i c e that five of your

pupils have IQ s c o r e s o v e r 1 4 5 , well i n t o t h e genius r a n g e . Do you think that

y o u r t r e a t m e n t a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s o f t h o s e c h i l d r e n d u r i n g t h e school year

would b e t h e s a m e a s o f y o u r o t h e r students? W h a t a b o u t y o u r e x p e c t a t i o n s o f

those students c o m p a r e d with a n o t h e r five students with IQ scores in the low-

t o - n o r m a l r a n g e ? I f you answered that y o u r t r e a t m e n t a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s would

Reading 13 What You Expect Is What You Get 99

be t h e s a m e , R o s e n t h a l would probably be willing to b e t t h a t you'd be wrong.

As a m a t t e r of fact, they probably shouldn't be t h e s a m e ! T h e p o i n t is, if y o u r

e x p e c t a t i o n s b e c a m e self-fulfilling p r o p h e c i e s , t h e n t h a t c o u l d b e unfair t o

s o m e o f t h e students. Now c o n s i d e r a n o t h e r , m o r e c r u c i a l point. S u p p o s e t h e

intelligence scores you received on y o u r class r o s t e r w e r e wrong. If these e r r o -

n e o u s scores c r e a t e d e x p e c t a t i o n s that benefited s o m e students o v e r o t h e r s , i t

would clearly be unfair a n d probably u n e t h i c a l . This is o n e of t h e m a j o r issues

fueling t h e intelligence testing controversy.

In r e c e n t d e c a d e s , r e s e a r c h e r s have c h a r g e d t h a t m a n y standard tests

used to assess t h e intelligence of c h i l d r e n c o n t a i n a racial or cultural bias. T h e

a r g u m e n t is that b e c a u s e t h e tests were originally designed primarily by white,

upper-middle-class males, they c o n t a i n ideas a n d i n f o r m a t i o n to which o t h e r

ethnic g r o u p s a r e less e x p o s e d . C h i l d r e n f r o m s o m e e t h n i c minority g r o u p s in

the U n i t e d States have traditionally s c o r e d lower on these tests than white chil-

d r e n . It would be ridiculous to assume that these nonwhite c h i l d r e n possess

less overall basic intelligence than white children, so t h e r e a s o n for these dif-

ferences in scores must lie in t h e tests themselves. Traditionally, however,

t e a c h e r s in G r a d e s K t h r o u g h 12 were given this intelligence i n f o r m a t i o n on all

their students. If you stop a n d think a b o u t this fact in relation to t h e r e s e a r c h

by Rosenthal a n d J a c o b s o n , you'll see what a potentially p r e c a r i o u s situation

may have been c r e a t e d . In addition to t h e fact that c h i l d r e n have b e e n c a t e g o -

rized a n d stratified in schools a c c o r d i n g to their test scores, t e a c h e r s ' unin-

t e n d e d e x p e c t a t i o n s , based on this possibly biased information, may have b e e n

creating systemic, unfair self-fulfilling p r o p h e c i e s . T h e a r g u m e n t s supporting

this idea a r e convincing e n o u g h that m a n y school districts have instituted a

m o r a t o r i u m on r o u t i n e intelligence testing a n d t h e use of intelligence test

scores until new tests a r e developed ( o r old o n e s u p d a t e d ) to be valid a n d bias

free. At t h e c o r e of these a r g u m e n t s is t h e r e s e a r c h addressed in this c h a p t e r .

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Due i n large p a r t t o R o s e n t h a l a n d J a c o b s o n ' s r e s e a r c h , t h e power o f t e a c h -

ers' e x p e c t a t i o n s o n students' p e r f o r m a n c e has b e c o m e a n integral p a r t o f

o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e e d u c a t i o n a l process. F u r t h e r m o r e , Rosenthal's the-

o r y o f i n t e r p e r s o n a l e x p e c t a n c i e s has e x e r t e d its influence i n n u m e r o u s a r e a s

o t h e r than e d u c a t i o n . I n 2 0 0 2 , R o s e n t h a l himself reviewed t h e l i t e r a t u r e o n

e x p e c t a n c y effects using meta-analysis t e c h n i q u e s ( e x p l a i n e d in t h e r e a d i n g

o n Smith a n d Glass i n C h a p t e r I X ) . H e d e m o n s t r a t e d how "the e x p e c t a t i o n s

o f psychological r e s e a r c h e r s , c l a s s r o o m t e a c h e r s , j u d g e s i n t h e c o u r t r o o m ,

business executives, a n d h e a l t h c a r e providers c a n unintentionally affect t h e

responses o f their r e s e a r c h participants, pupils, j u r o r s , employees, a n d pa-

tients" ( R o s e n t h a l , 2 0 0 2 , p . 8 3 9 ) .

A n u n c o m f o r t a b l y revealing article i n c o r p o r a t i n g Rosenthal's ex-

p e c t a n c y r e s e a r c h e x a m i n e d t h e c r i t e r i a s c h o o l t e a c h e r s use t o r e f e r t h e i r stu-

dents to s c h o o l psychologists for assessment a n d c o u n s e l i n g (Andrews, et al,

100 Chapter PV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

Reading 14: JUST HOW ARE YOU INTELLIGENT? Gardner, H. (1983) Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences.

New York: Basic Books.

T h e h e a d i n g for this c h a p t e r is an i n t e n t i o n a l play on words. T h e usual f o r m

of t h e question 'Just how intelligent are you?" implies that you have a c e r t a i n

a m o u n t of intelligence. T h e question h e r e , "Just how a r e you intelligent?" is

u n r e l a t e d to amount of overall intelligence a n d asks instead a b o u t the n a t u r e

1 9 9 7 ) . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s f o u n d t h a t t e a c h e r s r e f e r r e d African A m e r i c a n chil-

d r e n for d e v e l o p m e n t a l h a n d i c a p assessment at rates significandy h i g h e r than

t h e rates of C a u c a s i a n students in t h e i r classrooms. In addition, boys were r e -

f e r r e d in equally d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e n u m b e r s over girls for p r o b l e m s of class-

r o o m a n d playground behavior p r o b l e m s . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s suggested that t h e

differences a m o n g t h e various s t u d e n t g r o u p s may have revealed m o r e a b o u t

t e a c h e r s ' e x p e c t a n c i e s t h a n real individual differences.

It should be n o t e d that r e s e a r c h e r s in t h e fields of psychology a n d edu-

c a t i o n a r e actively studying new ways of c o n c e p t u a l i z i n g a n d m e a s u r i n g chil-

dren's intellectual abilities. Several leading r e s e a r c h e r s have p r o p o s e d m e t h o d s

o f testing t h a t focus o n c u r r e n t t h e o r i e s o f how t h e h u m a n brain works, a n d

t h a t go far b e y o n d t h e old, limited i d e a of a single, g e n e r a l intelligence s c o r e

expressed a s I Q (see B e n s o n , 2 0 0 3 ) . O n e o f these m o d e r n approaches i s Robert

Sternberg's Triarchic Abilities Test ( 1 9 9 3 ) , which is designed to m e a s u r e t h r e e

distinct aspects of intellectual ability: analytic intelligence, p r a c t i c a l intelli-

g e n c e , a n d creative intelligence. A n o t h e r leading r e s e a r c h e r i n t h e field o f

intelligence is H o w a r d G a r d n e r , who, in t h e early 1 9 8 0 s , d e v e l o p e d his t h e o r y

of multiple intelligences, which c o n t i n u e s today to e x e r t a powerful influence

o v e r t h e study a n d m e a s u r e m e n t of intelligence. As you will discover in the

n e x t r e a d i n g , G a r d n e r ' s t h e o r y c o n t e n d s that w e have n o t o n e , o r t h r e e , but

e i g h t ( a n d , p e r h a p s nine o r m o r e ! ) separate intelligences, a n d e a c h o f u s has

differing a m o u n t s o f e a c h o n e ( G a r d n e r , 2 0 0 6 ) .

Andrews, T., Wisniewski,J., & Mulick.J. ( 1 9 9 7 ) . Variables influencing teachers' decisions to refer children for school psychological assessment services. Psychology in Schools, 3 4 ( 3 ) , 2 3 9 - 2 4 4 .

Benson, E. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Intelligent intelligence testing: Psychologists are broadening the concept of intelligence and how to test it [Electronic version]. Monitor on Psychology, 34(2), 48.

Chaiken, A., Sigler, E., & Derlega, V. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . Nonverbal mediators of teacher expectancy effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 30, 144—149.

Gardner, H. ( 2 0 0 6 ) . Multiple intelligences: New horizons. Jackson, TN: Perseus Books Group. Pfungst, O. ( 1 9 1 1 ) . Clever Hans (the horse of Mr. von Osten): A contribution to experimental, animal, and

human psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Rosenthal, R. ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Covert communication in classrooms, clinics, courtrooms, and cubicles.

American Psychologist, 57, 8 3 9 - 8 4 9 . Rosenthal, R., & Fode, K. ( 1 9 6 3 ) . The effect of experimenter bias on the performance of the al-

bino rat. Behavioral Science, 8, 1 8 3 - 1 8 9 . Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L. ( 1 9 6 8 ) . Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectations and pupils' in-

tellectual development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Sternberg, R . J . ( 1 9 9 3 ) . Sternberg Triarchic Abilities Test. Unpublished test, Yale University.

Reading 14 Just How are You Intelligent? 101

o f your p a r t i c u l a r type o f intelligence. This implies, o f c o u r s e t h a t p e o p l e a r e

n o t simply m o r e or less intelligent but t h a t e a c h of us possesses a u n i q u e c o m -

bination of various f o r m s of intellectual abilities.

Many, if not most, of you probably have taken at least o n e intelligence test in

your life (even if you don't r e m e m b e r it), and s o m e of you may have taken several.

F o r the most part, intelligence tests developed over the past h u n d r e d years have

been designed to p r o d u c e a single score. T h a t score was called your Intelligence

Quotient ( I Q ) . If tests of intelligence a r e designed to p r o d u c e a single score, a per-

son's intelligence must also be conceptualized as a single, general mental ability.

T h a t is exacdy how intelligence was interpreted throughout most of the 2 0 t h cen-

tury. In fact, intelligence was often referred to as g-foi this general mental ability.

People's IQ score, their g was used widely to place, j u d g e , categorize, a n d describe

people in various life settings, including school, the workplace, a n d the military.

I n the 1 9 7 0 s a n d 1 9 8 0 s , r e s e a r c h e r s b e g a n t o question t h e validity o f t h e

unitary, g-theory a p p r o a c h t o h u m a n intelligence. Many o f t h e I Q tests t h e m -

selves were shown to be biased toward c e r t a i n e c o n o m i c classes a n d cultural

groups. Moreover, children's e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s were often d i c t a t e d

by their scores on these biased a n d potentially invalid scores (see t h e work of

R o b e r t R o s e n t h a l i n R e a d i n g 1 3 for a n e x a m p l e o f t h e d a n g e r s o f this b i a s ) .

As criticisms of the early conceptualization of intelligence grew in n u m -

b e r a n d influence, IQ tests b e g a n fade. At t h e same time, a new, a n d at t h e time

radically different, view of intelligence was making its way into scientific a n d

p o p u l a r thinking a b o u t how o u r minds work. In stark c o n t r a s t to the n o t i o n of

a single, generalized intelligence, this e m e r g i n g a p p r o a c h e x p a n d e d t h e n o -

tion of intelligence into many different m e n t a l abilities, e a c h possessing in itself

the characteristics of a c o m p l e t e , "free-standing" intelligence. H o w a r d Gard-

ner, at H a r v a r d University, i n t r o d u c e d to t h e world this new view of multiple in-

telligences in his 1 9 8 3 book Frames of Mind, which f o r m s t h e basis of this c h a p t e r .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

G a r d n e r ' s t h e o r y of multiple intelligences (MI Theory) was based on m u c h

m o r e than simply observing t h e various, diverse m e n t a l skills p e o p l e c a n

d e m o n s t r a t e . His ideas stem f r o m his r e s e a r c h on t h e s t r u c t u r e of t h e brain it-

self. P r i o r to l a u n c h i n g his work on intelligence p e r se, G a r d n e r h a d spent

m o s t o f his c a r e e r studying t h e biology a n d functioning o f t h e brain. G a r d n e r

e x p a n d e d on previous r e s e a r c h that d e m o n s t r a t e d that t h e h u m a n brain is

n o t only diverse in its abilities but also e x t r e m e l y specialized in its functioning.

In o t h e r words, different r e g i o n s of y o u r brain have evolved to c a r r y o u t spe-

cific tasks related to thinking a n d knowing. This brain specialization may be

d e m o n s t r a t e d by observing, as G a r d n e r has d o n e , exactly what abilities a r e

lost or diminished when a p e r s o n e x p e r i e n c e s d a m a g e to a p a r t i c u l a r r e g i o n

of t h e b r a i n . F o r e x a m p l e , l a n g u a g e abilities reside in m o s t p e o p l e primarily

in o n e section of the brain's left h e m i s p h e r e , vision is c e n t e r e d in t h e occipi-

tal c o r t e x a t t h e r e a r o f t h e brain, a n d o n e specific brain s t r u c t u r e l o c a t e d a t

102 Chapter IV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

t h e base of t h e visual c o r t e x is responsible for y o u r ability to r e c o g n i z e a n d dis-

c r i m i n a t e a m o n g h u m a n faces ( s e e R e a d i n g 1 on M i c h a e l Gazzaniga's split-

brain r e s e a r c h for m o r e a b o u t brain specialization).

Carrying the theory of brain specialization a step further, G a r d n e r contends

that different parts of t h e h u m a n brain a r e responsible for different aspects of in-

telligence or, m o r e correctly, different intelligences altogether. To defend scien-

tifically his t h e o r y of multiple intelligences, G a r d n e r drew u p o n evidence from

many sources a n d developed criteria for defining a certain set of abilities as a

unique intelligence. G a r d n e r described his sources of data as follows:

In formulating my brief on multiple intelligences, I have reviewed evidence from a large and hitherto unrelated group of sources: studies of prodigies, gifted individuals, brain-damaged patients, idiot-savants [a rare form of mental retarda- tion or autism accompanied by extraordinary talent or ability in one or two men- tal areas], normal children, normal adults, experts in different lines of work, and individuals from diverse cultures, (p. 9)

M E T H O D

I n c o r p o r a t i n g i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m all these sources, G a r d n e r t h e n d e v e l o p e d a

set of e i g h t i n d i c a t o r s or "signs" t h a t define an intelligence. Any intellectual ability, or set of abilities, m u s t m a p o n t o m o s t of these c r i t e r i a , if it is to be c o n -

sidered a s e p a r a t e , a u t o n o m o u s intelligence:

1. Potential isolation of the intelligence by brain damage. G a r d n e r c o n t e n d e d

t h a t if a specific m e n t a l ability c a n be destroyed t h r o u g h brain d a m a g e

( s u c h as injury or s t r o k e ) , or if it r e m a i n s relatively i n t a c t when o t h e r

abilities have b e e n destroyed, this provides c o n v i n c i n g e v i d e n c e that the

ability m a y be a s e p a r a t e intelligence u n t o itself.

2. The existence of savants, prodigies, and other exceptional individuals relating to

the intelligence. You m a y be aware t h a t c e r t a i n individuals possess an ex-

t r e m e level of intellectual skill in o n e p a r t i c u l a r ability. S o m e mentally

r e t a r d e d a n d autistic p e o p l e d e m o n s t r a t e "strokes o f genius," a n d s o m e

p e o p l e with n o r m a l intelligence a r e prodigies, with abilities far b e y o n d

o t h e r s o f t h e i r a g e o r e x p e r i e n c e . G a r d n e r believes t h a t t h e e x c e p t i o n a l skills of these individuals l e n d significant s u p p o r t for c o n s i d e r i n g an ability as a s e p a r a t e intelligence.

3. A clear set of information-processing (thinking) operations linked to the intelli-

gence. This refers to m e n t a l abilities t h a t a r e specific to t h e ability u n d e r

c o n s i d e r a t i o n . To qualify as an intelligence, an ability m u s t involve a spe-

cific set of m e n t a l p r o c e s s e s , which G a r d n e r calls core operations, that

exist i n specific a r e a s o f t h e brain a n d a r e t r i g g e r e d b y c e r t a i n kinds o f

i n f o r m a t i o n . Table 14-1 lists t h e c o r e o p e r a t i o n s for t h e various intelli-

g e n c e s p r o p o s e d by G a r d n e r .

4. A distindive developmental history of the intelligence and the potential to reach

high levels of expertise. G a r d n e r believes t h a t an intelligence must include

Reading 14 Just How are You Intelligent? 103

TABLE 14-1 Core Operations and Well-Known Individual Examples of Gardner's Eight Intelligences

•proposed

a d e v e l o p m e n t a l path that starts with simple a n d basic steps a n d p r o -

gresses t h r o u g h i n c r e m e n t a l milestones of i n c r e a s e d skill levels.

5. Evidence that the intelligence has developed through evolutionary time. H u m a n

intelligence has evolved over millions of years as o n e of m a n y adaptive

m e c h a n i s m s that have allowed us to survive as a species. If a p a r t i c u l a r

set of abilities is to be defined as an intelligence, G a r d n e r believes t h e

skills involved should show e v i d e n c e of evolutionary d e v e l o p m e n t ,

based on cross-cultural r e s e a r c h a n d observations of similar types of abil-

ities in n o n h u m a n animals (such as t h e "mental maps" in t h e rats in Tol-

m a n ' s r e s e a r c h discussed i n R e a d i n g 1 5 . ) .

6. Ability to study the intelligence with psychological experiments. G a r d n e r main-

tains that any ability p r o p o s e d as an intelligence be c o n f i r m e d using solid

e x p e r i m e n t a l techniques t o b e c o n s i d e r e d a n intelligence. A n e x a m p l e o f

this might be an e x p e r i m e n t to d e t e r m i n e a person's speed a n d a c c u r a c y

104 Chapter TV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

FIGURE 14-1 Example of Mental Rotation Task to Assess Spatial Intelligence. Are the two figures in each set the same or different?

in a mental rotation task as a sign of spatial relationships skills. Figure 14-1

contains a d e m o n s t r a t i o n of this task. H o w fast c a n you figure it out?

7. Ability to measure the intelligence with existing standardized tests. H e r e , Gard-

n e r acknowledges t h e potential value o f I Q a n d o t h e r intelligence tests

of t h e past. However, t h e value he sees is n o t in t h e tests' ability to p r o -

d u c e a single intelligence s c o r e b u t in t h e fact t h a t s o m e of t h e tests c o n -

tain various subscales t h a t may, in fact, m e a s u r e different intelligences.

8. Aspects of the intelligence may be represented by a system of symbols. G a r d n e r

p r o p o s e s t h a t any h u m a n intelligence should i n c o r p o r a t e a system of

symbols. T h e m o s t obvious o f these, o f c o u r s e , a r e h u m a n l a n g u a g e a n d

m a t h . O t h e r e x a m p l e s o f symbol systems i n c l u d e n o t a t i o n for musical

ability a n d p i c t u r e s for spatial skills.

In t h e n e x t section we look at a s u m m a r y of t h e intelligences G a r d n e r

p r o p o s e d as p a r t of his original t h e o r y in his 1 9 8 3 b o o k . E a c h intelligence in-

c l u d e d was analyzed using his eight c r i t e r i a . If an intellectual ability failed to

m e e t m o s t o f t h e c r i t e r i a , i t was r e j e c t e d . T h r o u g h this p r o c e s s o f elimination,

G a r d n e r originally suggested seven distinct h u m a n intelligences, later a d d e d

an e i g h t h , a n d has r e c e n ü y p r o p o s e d a ninth.

G a r d n e r discussed e a c h of his original seven intelligences in detail in his 1 9 8 3

b o o k . H e r e , y o u will find b r i e f descriptions of e a c h intelligence, along with a

q u o t e f r o m G a r d n e r , to give y o u t h e "flavor" of t h e abilities described. In ad-

dition, Table 14-1 s u m m a r i z e s t h e c o r e o p e r a t i o n s o f e a c h intelligence a n d

provides e x a m p l e s of several well-known individuals w h o would be likely to

scoring high o n t h e abilities t h a t c o m p r i s e e a c h intelligence. A l t h o u g h Gard-

n e r d o e s n o t e n d o r s e any single test for m e a s u r i n g multiple intelligences,

m a n y have b e e n developed. You c a n try s o m e of these o n l i n e simply by search-

ing for "tests of multiple intelligence," b u t k e e p in m i n d t h a t a g r e a t deal of

m a t e r i a l on t h e I n t e r n e t is of questionable validity.

R E S U L T S

Reading 14 Just How Are You Intelligent? 105

Linguistic Intelligence. If you a r e strong in linguistic intelligence, you a r e

able to use words in ways t h a t a r e m o r e skillful, useful, a n d creative t h a n t h e

a v e r a g e p e r s o n . You a r e able t o use l a n g u a g e t o c o n v i n c e o t h e r s o f y o u r posi-

tion; you c a n m e m o r i z e a n d recall detailed o r c o m p l e x i n f o r m a t i o n ; y o u a r e

b e t t e r than most a t e x p l a i n i n g a n d t e a c h i n g c o n c e p t s a n d ideas t o o t h e r s ; a n d

you enjoy using l a n g u a g e to talk a b o u t l a n g u a g e itself. G a r d n e r suggested t h a t

talented p o e t s a r e g o o d e x a m p l e s o f individuals possessing s t r o n g linguistic

intelligence:

In the poet's struggles over the wording of a line or stanza, one sees at work some central aspects of linguistic intelligence. The poet must be superlatively sensitive to the shades of meanings of words and must try to preserve as many of the sought-after meanings as possible. . . . A sensitivity to the order among words, the capacity to follow the rules of grammar, and, on carefully selected oc- casions, to violate them. At a somewhat more sensory level—a sensitivity to the sounds, rhythms, inflections, and meters of words—that ability to make poetry even in a foreign tongue beautiful to hear. (pp. 7 7 - 7 8 )

Musical Intelligence. You a r e probably already guessing s o m e o f t h e c o m p o -

n e n t s of musical intelligence: gifted abilities involving s o u n d , especially p i t c h ,

t i m b r e , a n d rhythm. G a r d n e r c l a i m e d t h a t this is t h e earliest of all intelli-

g e n c e s to e m e r g e . Musical child prodigies serve as e x a m p l e s of individuals

who a r e "musical geniuses." G a r d n e r points to t h e musical c o m p o s e r to illus-

trate musical intelligence:

[A] composer can be readily identified by the facts that he constantly has "tones in his head"—that is, he is always, somewhere near the surface of consciousness, hearing tones, rhythms, and larger musical patterns, (p. 1 0 1 )

Logical-Mathematical Intelligence. This intelligence enables you to think

about, analyze, a n d c o m p u t e various relationships a m o n g a b s t r a c t objects,

c o n c e p t s , a n d ideas. H i g h levels o f this intelligence may b e f o u n d a m o n g

m a t h e m a t i c i a n s , scientists, a n d philosophers, b u t they may also be p r e s e n t in

those individuals who a r e obsessed with sports statistics, design c o m p u t e r

c o d e , or develop a l g o r i t h m s as a hobby:

What characterizes [this] individual is a love of dealing with abstraction. . . . The mathematician must be absolutely rigorous and perennially skeptical: no fact can be accepted unless it has been proved rigorously by steps that are derived from universally accepted first principles. . . . One obvious source of delight attends the solution of a problem that has long been considered insoluble, (pp. 138-141)

Spatial Intelligence. You would score well in spatial intelligence if you a r e

skilled in creating, visualizing, a n d manipulating mental images. T h e s e a r e abili-

ties that c o m e naturally a n d easily to those in various visually oriented professions

or avocations, such as artists, sculptors, interior d e c o r a t o r s , engineers, a n d archi-

tects. To be m o r e specific, G a r d n e r explained that spatial intelligence entails:

The ability to recognize instances of the same element; the ability to transform or to recognize a transformation of one element into another; the capacity to

106 Chapter TV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

conjure up mental imagery and then to transform that imagery; the capacity to produce a graphic likeness of spatial information; and the like. (p. 176)

T h e o b j e c t r o t a t i o n task in F i g u r e 14-1 is an e x a m p l e of a skill with which

s o m e o n e s t r o n g in spatial intelligence would have very little difficulty.

B o d i l y Kinesthetic Intelligence. T h e s e abilides also m i g h t be called "physical

intelligence." If you possess s t r o n g bodily kinesthetic intelligence, you a r e

very aware of y o u r own b o d y a n d bodily m o v e m e n t s a n d a r e skilled in using

a n d c o n t r o l l i n g y o u r body to achieve various goals or effects. As you might

i m a g i n e , d a n c e r s , athletes, s u r g e o n s , p o t t e r s , a n d m a n y a c t o r s possess a high

d e g r e e o f bodily intelligence. G a r d n e r g o e s o n t o explain:

Characteristic of such an intelligence is the ability to use one's body in highly dif- ferentiated and skilled ways, for expressive as well as goal-directed purposes. . . . Characteristic as well is the capacity to work skillfully with objects, both those that involve fine motor movements of one's fingers and hands and those that ex- ploit gross motor movements of the body. (pp. 2 0 6 - 2 0 7 )

T h e n e x t two intelligences G a r d n e r p r o p o s e s , a l t h o u g h s e p a r a t e , fall

i n t o a single c a t e g o r y t h a t G a r d n e r called t h e personal intelligences. O n e type of

p e r s o n a l intelligence is focused inward, while t h e o t h e r is focused outward.

He r e f e r r e d to these as intrapersonal intelligence a n d interpersonal intelligence, re-

spectively.

I n t r a p e r s o n a l Intelligence. H o w well do you "know yourself} G a r d n e r pro-

p o s e d that t h e ability to be aware of a n d u n d e r s t a n d who you a r e , y o u r e m o -

tions, y o u r motivations, a n d t h e sources of your actions exist in varying d e g r e e s

a m o n g h u m a n s . G a r d n e r describes intrapersonal intelligence as follows:

The core capacity here is access to one's own feeling life—one's range of emotions: the capacity instandy to effect discriminations among these feelings and, even- tually, to label them, to enmesh them in symbolic codes, to draw upon them as a means of understanding and guiding one's behavior, (p. 239)

I n t e r p e r s o n a l Intelligence. This intelligence is c o n t r a s t e d with intrapersonal

intelligence by asking "How well do y o u know othersT I n t e r p e r s o n a l intelli-

g e n c e involves skills similar to t h o s e of i n t r a p e r s o n a l intelligence, but they a r e

o u t w a r d d i r e c t e d — f o c u s e d o n t h e feelings, motivations, desires, a n d behav-

iors o f o t h e r p e o p l e :

The core capacity here is the ability to notice and make distinctions among other individuals and, in particular, among their moods, temperaments, motivations, and intentions. In an advanced form, interpersonal knowledge permits a skilled adult to read the intentions and desires—even when these have been hidden—of many other individuals and, potentially to act upon this knowledge, (p. 239)

T h e s e , t h e n , a r e t h e seven sets o f abilities t h a t c o m p r i s e d G a r d n e r ' s orig-

inal c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of multiple intelligences. He states very clearly in

Frames of Mind t h a t these f o r m e d a working, a n d s o m e w h a t preliminary, list

a n d t h a t t h r o u g h f u r t h e r study a n d r e s e a r c h o t h e r intelligences m i g h t b e

Reading 14 Just How are You Intelligent? 107

a d d e d o r a c o n v i n c i n g a r g u m e n t m i g h t b e m a d e t o r e m o v e o n e o r m o r e o f

t h e original seven. W h a t has h a p p e n e d o v e r t h e years is that these seven intel-

ligences have m a i n t a i n e d t h e i r positions in t h e theory, a n d , as discussed

shortly, G a r d n e r has a d d e d an e i g h t h ( a n d p e r h a p s a n i n t h ) intelligence.

S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H A N D C R I T I C I S M S

G a r d n e r ' s MI T h e o r y was immediately seized u p o n by e d u c a t o r s , p a r e n t s , a n d

society in g e n e r a l as p r o o f of a belief they h a d always held: people are smart in

different ways. Finally, h e r e was an e x p l a n a t i o n for t h o s e c h i l d r e n ( a n d adults,

t o o ) w h o p e r f o r m e d poorly on tests a n d in s o m e subjects in s c h o o l but w e r e

clearly exceptionally bright in o t h e r ways.

M I T h e o r y m a p p e d well o n t o growing c o n c e r n s a n d r e s e a r c h a b o u t

learning disabilities a n d was largely responsible for t h e r e f o r m u l a t i o n in edu-

cation of "learning disabilities" i n t o "learning differences." I n d e e d , MI T h e -

o r y has e x e r c i s e d its g r e a t e s t influence i n t h e a r e a o f e d u c a t i o n , a n d

G a r d n e r ' s r e s e a r c h following t h e publication of Frames of Mind focused on a p -

plying his ideas to e n h a n c i n g t h e e d u c a t i o n a l p r o c e s s for c h i l d r e n a n d adults.

As G a r d n e r was revisiting his original t h e o r y 10 years after its original pub-

lication, he considered the possibility of o t h e r sets of abilities that might qualify

as intelligences. Several candidates had b e e n suggested to him by colleagues in

various fields, such as a "spiritual intelligence," a "sexual intelligence," a n d a "dig-

ital intelligence" (Gardner, 2 0 0 3 ) . Although G a r d n e r c o n c e d e s that selecting a

certain set of skills that qualify as an intelligence is o p e n to subjective interpreta-

tions, he believed that these a n d many o t h e r suggestions did n o t m e e t his eight

criteria adequately to qualify as new intelligences. G a r d n e r did, however, find an

additional set of abilities that he felt clearly m e t the criteria for an intelligence.

G a r d n e r was asked by a colleague to describe the abilities of history's most influ-

ential biologists, a n d when he a t t e m p t e d to do so he realized that n o n e of the

o t h e r seven intelligences fit those individuals very well. This sparked the addition

of an eighth ability that he called, naturalist intelligence. G a r d n e r explains:

The naturalist intelligence refers to the ability to recognize and classify plants, minerals, and animals, including rocks and grass and all variety of flora and fauna. Darwin is probably the most famous example of a naturalist because he saw so deeply into the nature of living things, (quoted in Checkley, 1997)

Currently, t h e eight intelligences discussed h e r e c o m p r i s e G a r d n e r ' s MI

T h e o r y . B u t G a r d n e r is n o t yet finished with his theory. He sees t h e n o t i o n of

multiple intelligences as fluid: always o p e n to new, clearly defined sets of abil-

ities. O n e skill he has suggested t h a t m i g h t fit his c r i t e r i a for an intelligence

fairly well is existential intelligence. B e c a u s e existential intelligence a p p e a r s to

be n e a r i n g t h e threshold for inclusion in MI T h e o r y , it has b e e n i n c l u d e d

h e r e in Table 1 4 - 1 . G a r d n e r describes existential intelligence as follows:

This candidate for intelligence is based on the human proclivity to ponder the most fundamental questions of existence. Why do we live? Why do we die? Where do we come from? What is going to happen to us? What is love? Why do

108 Chapter PV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

we make war? I sometime say that these are questions that transcend perception; they concern issues that are too big or too small to be perceived by our five prin- cipie sensory systems. (Gardner, 2006, p. 20)

Since t h e 1 9 8 3 release of Frames of Mind, G a r d n e r has published n u m e r -

o u s b o o k s a n d articles refining his t h e o r y a n d applying it in relevant settings.

It is safe to say t h a t MI T h e o r y has b e e n applied in e d u c a t i o n a l settings, espe-

cially K - 1 2 , p e r h a p s m o r e t h a n i n any o t h e r l e a r n i n g o r thinking environ-

m e n t . F o r e x a m p l e , only o n e y e a r after t h e publication of Frames of Mind, a

s c h o o l district in Indianapolis b e g a n redesigning its c u r r i c u l u m completely

a r o u n d MI theory. Today virtually all schools in t h e U n i t e d States a n d m a n y

o t h e r c o u n t r i e s i n c o r p o r a t e t h e t h e o r y t o varying d e g r e e s .

A l t h o u g h M I T h e o r y i s a n e x t r e m e l y p o p u l a r a p p r o a c h t o h u m a n intel-

l i g e n c e a n d has f o u n d widespread s u p p o r t i n various r e s e a r c h a n d e d u c a -

tional d o m a i n s , it has certainly n o t g o n e uncriticized. New, influential

t h e o r i e s t h a t c h a l l e n g e long-standing views in any s c i e n c e a r e typically targets

for intense controversy within t h e field. MI T h e o r y has b e e n no different.

O n e c o m m o n o b j e c t i o n t o M I T h e o r y suggests that G a r d n e r ' s eight intelli-

g e n c e s a r e n o t really s e p a r a t e intelligences but r a t h e r merely d e s c r i b e differ-

e n t "thinking styles," all of which may be seen as existing within e a r l i e r unified

intelligence ( g ) views discussed at t h e b e g i n n i n g of this r e a d i n g ( M o r g a n ,

1 9 9 6 ) . A n o t h e r criticism c o n t e n d s that t h e t h e o r y c o n t a i n s e m b e d d e d c o n t r a -

dictions t h a t m a k e it t o o a m b i g u o u s to be valid (Klein, 1 9 9 8 ) . Moreover, s o m e

c o n t e n d , b e c a u s e of its ambiguity, that MI T h e o r y c a n be m o l d e d "conve-

niently" to explain virtually any cognitive activity, r e n d e r i n g it impossible to

prove o r disprove. M o r e o v e r , s o m e r e s e a r c h e r s have a r g u e d that n o t e n o u g h

r i g o r o u s scientific r e s e a r c h has b e e n u n d e r t a k e n to d e m o n s t r a t e t h e validity

of t h e intelligences a n d t h e effectiveness of applying MI T h e o r y in real-world

settings. T h e s e critics suggest—if future r e s e a r c h finds t h a t MI T h e o r y is n o t a

valid or effective t o o l — t h a t a g r e a t deal of time a n d effort will have b e e n

wasted a n d t h a t l e a r n i n g t h o u g h t to have b e e n taking p l a c e , in reality, was n o t

(Collins, 1 9 9 8 ) . T h e s e a n d o t h e r criticisms notwithstanding, M I T h e o r y c o n -

tinues t o influence strongly t h e f i e l d o f h u m a n intelligence.

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

H u n d r e d s o f scientific articles a n d books t h a t rest o n H o w a r d G a r d n e r ' s T h e -

o r y o f Multiple Intelligences, a n d that cite his 1 9 8 3 book, a p p e a r every year.

Dr. G a r d n e r ' s work in this a r e a c o n t i n u e s to have a powerful a n d widespread

i m p a c t o n r e s e a r c h a n d thinking a b o u t l e a r n i n g a n d intelligence. T o give you

an i d e a of t h e diverse applications of MI T h e o r y , following is a brief descrip-

tion o f j u s t two o f these r e c e n t applications.

A cross-cultural study of G a r d n e r ' s seven intelligences c o m p a r e d British

a n d I r a n i a n students' self-ratings a n d t h e i r ratings of their p a r e n t s ' levels of

e a c h o f G a r d n e r ' s intelligences ( F u r n h a m e t al., 2 0 0 2 ) . S o m e o f t h e m o s t in-

teresting findings w e r e t h a t ( a ) I r a n i a n students r a t e d themselves lower in

Reading 14 Just How are You Intelligent? 109

logical-mathematical intelligence b u t h i g h e r in spatial, musical, a n d i n t r a p e r -

sonal intelligence t h a n did t h e British students; ( b ) I r a n i a n s p e r c e i v e d t h e i r

fathers' m a t h e m a t i c a l a n d spatial intelligence to be lower b u t t h e i r fathers' in-

t e r p e r s o n a l a n d i n t r a p e r s o n a l intelligence t o b e h i g h e r t h a n did t h e British

students; ( c ) t h e I r a n i a n students r a t e d t h e i r m o t h e r s ' level o f intelligence

lower t h a n did t h e British students on all b u t o n e ( i n t r a p e r s o n a l ) of t h e seven

intelligences; a n d ( d ) t h e I r a n i a n s r a t e d t h e i r b r o t h e r s h i g h e r t h a n did t h e

British students on all but o n e scale ( m a t h e m a t i c a l ) .

A n o t h e r fascinating study r e l a t e d G a r d n e r ' s t h e o r y t o S a n d r a Bern's r e -

s e a r c h o n a n d r o g y n y (Bern's study i s discussed i n R e a d i n g 2 6 ) . T h e a u t h o r s

found t h a t people's estimates of t h e i r own i n t e l l i g e n c e was linked to t h e i r

gender-identity ( R a m m s t e d t & R a m m s a y e r , 2 0 0 2 ) . R e s e a r c h e r s asked partici-

pants to e s t i m a t e t h e i r own level on various intelligences a n d also to c o m -

plete t h e Bern Sex Role Inventory to m e a s u r e t h e i r level of masculinity,

femininity, a n d androgyny. N o t only w e r e g e n d e r d i f f e r e n c e s f o u n d for t h e

l o g i c a l - m a t h e m a t i c a l i n t e l l i g e n c e ( m a s c u l i n e ) versus musical i n t e l l i g e n c e

( f e m i n i n e ) , b u t also t h e males' d e g r e e o f self-perceived masculinity, feminin-

ity, or a n d r o g y n y significantly i n f l u e n c e d t h e i r estimates of t h e i r own levels of

various intelligences.

C O N C L U S I O N

G a r d n e r ' s MI T h e o r y has survived o v e r two d e c a d e s a n d shows no signs of fad-

ing f r o m view. W h e t h e r t h e ideas of t h e t h e o r y c o n t i n u e to g r o w in i m p o r -

t a n c e a n d influence o r b e c o m e overshadowed b y new c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n s o f

intelligence r e m a i n s to be seen. W h a t e v e r its future, however, o n e p o i n t is c e r -

tain: MI T h e o r y has c h a n g e d forever how t h e world looks at l e a r n i n g , t e a c h -

ing, a n d intelligence. However, G a r d n e r himself c a u t i o n s t h a t MI T h e o r y is a

*.leans to an e n d a n d should n o t be seen as an e n d in itself:

Educational goals should reflect one's own values, and these can never come simply or directly from a scientific theory. Once one reflects on one's educa- tional values and states one's goals, however, then the putative existence of our multiple intelligences can prove very helpful. And, in particular, if one's educa- tional goals encompass disciplinary understanding, then it is possible to mobi- lize our several intelligences to help achieve that lofty goal. . . . I have come to realize that once one releases an idea into the world, one cannot completely control its behavior—anymore than one can control those products of our genes called children. Put succinctly, MI has and will have a life of its own, over and above what I might wish for it, my most widely known intellectual offspring. (Gardner, 2002)

Checkley, K. ( 1 9 9 7 ) . The first seven . . . and the eighth. Educational Leadership, 55, 8 - 1 3 . Collins, J. ( 1 9 9 8 ) . Seven kinds of smart. Time, 152, 9 4 - 9 6 . Furnham, A., Shahidi, S., & Baluch, B. ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Sex and cultural differences in perceptions of esti-

mated multiple intelligence for self and family: A British-Iranian comparison. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 33, 2 7 0 - 2 8 5 .

Gardner, H. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Multiple intelligences after twenty years. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, April 2 1 , 2 0 0 3 .

110 Chapter IV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

Gardner, H. ( 2 0 0 6 ) . Multiple intelligences: New horizons. Jackson, TN: Perseus Books Group. Klein, P. ( 1 9 9 8 ) . Aresponse to Howard Gardner: Falsifiability, empirical evidence, and pedagogi-

cal usefulness in educational psychologies. Canadian Journal of Education, 23, 1 0 3 - 1 1 2 . Morgan, H. ( 1 9 9 6 ) . An analysis of Gardner's theory of multiple intelligence. Roeper Review, 18,

2 6 3 - 2 6 9 . Rammstedt, B., & Rammsayer, T. ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Gender differences in self-estimated intelligence and

their relation to gender-role orientation. European Journal of Personality, 16, 3 6 9 - 3 8 2 .

Reading 15: MAPS IN YOUR MIND Tollman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and men. Psychological Review,

55,189-208.

Many o f t h e studies i n this b o o k a r e i n c l u d e d b e c a u s e t h e t h e o r e t i c a l proposi-

tions underlying t h e m a n d t h e i r findings c o n t r a d i c t e d t h e prevailing view a n d

c o n v e n t i o n a l wisdom o f t h e i r t i m e . B o u c h a r d ' s revelations c o n c e r n i n g ge-

n e t i c influences o n personality ( R e a d i n g 3 ) , H o b s o n a n d McCarley's c o n c e p -

tualization o f d r e a m s ( R e a d i n g 7 ) .Watson's study o f Little Albert ( R e a d i n g

1 0 ) , a n d Harlow's t h e o r y o f infant a t t a c h m e n t ( R e a d i n g 1 7 ) , a m o n g o t h e r r e -

s e a r c h studies, all c h a l l e n g e d t h e status q u o of psychological thinking a n d

t h e r e b y o p e n e d u p new a n d often r e v o l u t i o n a r y i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s o f h u m a n be-

havior. E d w a r d C . T o l m a n ' s t h e o r i e s a n d studies o f l e a r n i n g a n d c o g n i t i o n

m a d e j u s t such a c o n t r i b u t i o n . During t h e years w h e n psychology was c o n -

s u m e d with strict stimulus-response l e a r n i n g t h e o r i e s t h a t dismissed u n o b -

servable, i n t e r n a l m e n t a l activity as "unknowable," T o l m a n , at t h e University

o f California a t Berkeley, was d o i n g e x p e r i m e n t s d e m o n s t r a t i n g that c o m p l e x

i n t e r n a l cognitive activity c o u l d be studied in rats, n o t only in p e o p l e , a n d that

these m e n t a l processes c o u l d b e studied without t h e necessity o f observing

t h e m direcdy. D u e to t h e significance of his work, T o l m a n is c o n s i d e r e d to be

t h e f o u n d e r o f a s c h o o l o f t h o u g h t within t h e field o f l e a r n i n g psychology that

is called cognitive-behaviorism.

T o e x p e r i e n c e s o m e o f what T o l m a n p r o p o s e d , i m a g i n e for a m o m e n t

t h a t you want to m a k e y o u r way f r o m y o u r p r e s e n t l o c a t i o n to t h e n e a r e s t post

office o r video s t o r e . You probably already have a n i m a g e i n y o u r m i n d o f

w h e r e these a r e l o c a t e d . Now think a b o u t t h e r o u t e y o u would take t o get

t h e r e . You know you have to take c e r t a i n streets, m a k e specific t u r n s at t h e

right intersections, a n d eventually e n t e r t h e building. T h i s p i c t u r e in y o u r

m i n d o f y o u r p r e s e n t location relative t o t h e post office o r video store a n d t h e

r o u t e you would follow to travel between t h e m is called a mental representation.

T o l m a n called these r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s cognitive maps. T o l m a n m a i n t a i n e d that

n o t only d o h u m a n s use cognitive m a p s , b u t o t h e r animals, including rats,

think a b o u t t h e i r world in similar ways. W h y d o e s a n y o n e c a r e how a rat

thinks? Well, if y o u w e r e a l e a r n i n g theorist in t h e 1 9 3 0 s a n d 1 9 4 0 s , t h e main

r e s e a r c h m e t h o d being used was rats in mazes; p e o p l e were very interested in

how they learned.

Reading 15 Maps in Your Mind 111

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

I n t h e f i r s t half o f t h e 2 0 t h c e n t u r y , l e a r n i n g theorists w e r e o n t h e f r o n t lines

of psychology. In addition to trying to explain t h e m e c h a n i s m s involved in

learning, they were invested in d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e "respectability" of psychol-

ogy as a t r u e s c i e n c e . B e c a u s e psychology h a d b e e n e m e r g i n g as a s c i e n c e ,

from its r o o t s in philosophy, for only a few d e c a d e s , m a n y r e s e a r c h e r s felt t h a t

t h e best way to prove psychology's scientific potential was to e m u l a t e t h e so-

called hard sciences, such as physics a n d chemistry. This n o t i o n led t h e l e a r n -

ing theorists to p r o p o s e that t h e only p r o p e r subjects for study w e r e , as in

physics a n d chemistry, observable, m e a s u r a b l e events. In t h a t light, a stimulus

applied to an o r g a n i s m c o u l d be m e a s u r e d , a n d t h e o r g a n i s m ' s b e h a v i o r in r e -

sponse t o that stimulus c o u l d b e m e a s u r e d . B u t they c o n t e n d e d t h a t what

went on inside t h e o r g a n i s m between these two events was n o t o b s e r v a b l e or

m e a s u r a b l e , so it c o u l d n o t be studied a n d , m o r e o v e r , it was n o t c o n s i d e r e d

i m p o r t a n t . A c c o r d i n g to this view, w h e n a r a t l e a r n e d to r u n t h r o u g h a m a z e

faster a n d faster a n d with fewer a n d fewer e r r o r s , t h e l e a r n i n g p r o c e s s c o n -

sisted of a succession of stimuli to which a succession of c o r r e c t r e s p o n s e s led

t o t h e reward o f food a t t h e e n d o f t h e m a z e . This focused, stimulus-response,

c o n n e c t i o n i s t view o f all behavior f o r m e d t h e c o r e o f behaviorism a n d d o m i -

n a t e d the f i r s t 5 0 years o r s o o f behavioral psychology's history.

L e d by T o l m a n during the 1 9 3 0 s a n d 1 9 4 0 s , a small b a n d of "renegades"

a p p e a r e d who maintained that m u c h m o r e was going on inside the learning or-

ganism than m e r e responses to stimuli. In fact, T o l m a n p r o p o s e d two main

modifications to the prevailing view. O n e was that t h e t r u e n a t u r e a n d c o m p l e x -

ity of learning could n o t be fully u n d e r s t o o d without an e x a m i n a t i o n of t h e in-

ternal mental processes that a c c o m p a n y t h e observable stimuli a n d responses.

As Tolman stated in t h e famous 1 9 4 8 article that is the subject of this discussion:

We believe that in the course of learning something like a field map of the envi- ronment gets established in the rat's brain. We agree with the other [stimulus- response] school that the rat running a maze is exposed to stimuli and is finally led as a result of these stimuli to the responses which actually occur. We feel, however, that the intervening brain processes are more complicated, more pat- terned, and often . . . more autonomous than do the stimulus-response psychol- ogists, (p. 192)

T h e s e c o n d p r o p o s a l m a d e b y T o l m a n was t h a t even t h o u g h i n t e r n a l

cognitive processes c o u l d n o t be directly o b s e r v e d , they c o u l d be objectively

a n d scientifically i n f e r r e d f r o m observable behavior.

M E T H O D A N D R E S U L T S

T o l m a n p r e s e n t e d n u m e r o u s studies in his 1 9 4 8 article to s u p p o r t his views,

all of which involved m a z e l e a r n i n g by rats. Two of t h e studies t h a t clearly a n d

concisely d e m o n s t r a t e d his t h e o r e t i c a l position a r e i n c l u d e d h e r e .

T h e first was called t h e latent learning e x p e r i m e n t . F o r this study, rats

were divided into t h r e e g r o u p s . G r o u p C ( t h e c o n t r o l g r o u p ) was e x p o s e d to

112 Chapter IV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Days Group C: Control Group Group N: No reward Group D: Delayed reward

FIGURE 15-1 Latent learn- ing experiment error rates in maze learning. (Adapted from p. 195.)

a c o m p l e x maze using the standard p r o c e d u r e of o n e r u n through the maze

e a c h day with a food reward at the e n d of the maze. G r o u p N ( n o reward) was ex-

posed to the maze for the same a m o u n t of time e a c h day but found no food a n d

received no reward for any behavior in the maze. G r o u p D (delayed reward) was

treated e x a c d y like g r o u p N for t h e first 10 days of the study, but then on day 11

found food at t h e e n d of the maze a n d c o n t i n u e d to find it e a c h day thereafter.

F i g u r e 15-1 s u m m a r i z e s t h e results for t h e t h r e e g r o u p s based on t h e av-

e r a g e n u m b e r o f e r r o r s ( r u n n i n g down blind alleys) m a d e b y e a c h g r o u p o f

rats. As y o u c a n easily see in t h e g r a p h , t h e rats in G r o u p s N a n d D did n o t

l e a r n m u c h o f anything a b o u t t h e m a z e w h e n they w e r e n o t receiving any r e -

ward for r u n n i n g t h r o u g h t h e m a z e . T h e c o n t r o l rats l e a r n e d t h e m a z e t o

n e a r p e r f e c t i o n in a b o u t 2 weeks. However, w h e n t h e rats in G r o u p D discov-

e r e d a r e a s o n to r u n t h e m a z e ( f o o d ! ) , they l e a r n e d it to n e a r p e r f e c t i o n in

only a b o u t 3 days (day 11 to day 1 3 ) . T h e only possible e x p l a n a t i o n for these

findings was t h a t d u r i n g t h o s e 10 days w h e n t h e rats were w a n d e r i n g a r o u n d

i n t h e m a z e , they w e r e l e a r n i n g m u c h m o r e a b o u t t h e m a z e t h a n they were

showing. As T o l m a n e x p l a i n e d , "Once . . . they knew they were to get food,

they d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t d u r i n g t h e p r e c e d i n g n o n r e w a r d trials, they h a d

l e a r n e d w h e r e m a n y o f t h e blinds were. T h e y h a d b e e n building u p a ' m a p '

a n d c o u l d utilize [it] as s o o n as they w e r e m o t i v a t e d to do so" ( p . 1 9 5 ) .

T h e s e c o n d study to be discussed h e r e is called t h e "spatial orientation"

e x p e r i m e n t . Stimulus-response (S-R) theorists h a d m a i n t a i n e d t h a t a rat only

"knows" w h e r e t h e food reward is by r u n n i n g t h e m a z e ( a n d e x p e r i e n c i n g all

t h e S-R c o n n e c t i o n s ) to g e t to it. This is very m u c h like saying that you only

Reading 15 Maps in Your Mind 113

START

FIGURE 15-2 Spatial orientation experiment: Simple maze. (Adapted from p. 202.)

know w h e r e y o u r b e d r o o m is by walking o u t of t h e kitchen, a c r o s s t h e living

r o o m , down t h e hall, past t h e b a t h r o o m , a n d i n t o y o u r r o o m . I n reality, you

have a m e n t a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of w h e r e y o u r b e d r o o m is in t h e h o u s e without

having to "run t h e maze." T o l m a n ' s spatial o r i e n t a t i o n t e c h n i q u e was de-

signed to show that rats t r a i n e d in a m a z e actually know t h e l o c a t i o n in s p a c e

of t h e food reward relative to t h e i r starting position even if t h e e l e m e n t s of

t h e m a z e a r e radically c h a n g e d , o r even r e m o v e d .

First, rats l e a r n e d to r u n t h e simple m a z e shown in F i g u r e 15-2. T h e y

would e n t e r t h e m a z e a t t h e start, t h e n r u n a c r o s s a r o u n d table a n d i n t o t h e

path leading, in a s o m e w h a t circuitous r o u t e , to a food reward at t h e e n d . This

was a relatively simple m a z e a n d no p r o b l e m for t h e rats t h a t l e a r n e d it to

n e a r p e r f e c t i o n in 12 trials.

T h e n t h e m a z e was c h a n g e d to a sunburst p a t t e r n , similar to t h a t shown

in F i g u r e 15-3. Now when t h e t r a i n e d rats tried to r u n t h e i r usual r o u t e , they

found it blocked a n d h a d to r e t u r n to t h e r o u n d table. T h e r e they h a d a

f x ) LOCATION O F PREVIOUS FINISH

START

FIGURE 15-3 Spatial orien- tation experiment: Sunburst maze. (Adapted from p. 203)

114 Chapter IV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

2 3 4 5 6 7 Path Numbers

FIGURE 15-4 Spatial orientation experiment: Number of rats choosing each path. (Adapted from p. 204)

c h o i c e o f 1 2 possible a l t e r n a t e paths t o try t o g e t t o w h e r e t h e food h a d b e e n

i n t h e previous m a z e . F i g u r e 15-4 shows t h e n u m b e r o f rats c h o o s i n g e a c h o f

t h e 12 possible paths.

As you c a n see, P a t h 6, which r a n to a b o u t 4 i n c h e s f r o m w h e r e t h e food

r e w a r d b o x h a d b e e n p l a c e d in t h e previous m a z e , was c h o s e n by significantly

m o r e rats t h a n any o t h e r possible r o u t e . S-R t h e o r y m i g h t have p r e d i c t e d that

t h e rats would c h o o s e t h e p a t h m o s t closely in t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e first t u r n in

t h e original m a z e ( P a t h 1 1 ) , b u t this was n o t t h e c a s e . ' T h e rats h a d , i t would

s e e m , a c q u i r e d n o t merely a strip-map to t h e effect t h a t t h e original specifi-

cally trained-on p a t h led to food, b u t r a t h e r a wider, c o m p r e h e n s i v e m a p to

t h e effect t h a t f o o d was l o c a t e d in such a n d such a d i r e c d o n in t h e r o o m "

( p . 2 0 4 ) . H e r e , T o l m a n was e x p a n d i n g his t h e o r y b e y o n d t h e n o d o n that rats,

a n d potentially o t h e r o r g a n i s m s including h u m a n s , p r o d u c e cognitive m a p s

o f t h e r o u t e f r o m p o i n t A t o p o i n t Z . H e was d e m o n s t r a t i n g that t h e m a p s that

a r e p r o d u c e d a r e n o t m e r e strip maps r e p r e s e n t e d as A to B to C a n d so o n , to

Z , b u t a r e m u c h b r o a d e r , c o m p r e h e n s i v e o r c o n c e p t u a l m a p s t h a t give o r g a n -

isms a cognitive "lay of t h e land."

D I S C U S S I O N

T o l m a n ' s c o n c l u d i n g r e m a r k s in his 1 9 4 8 article focused on this distinction

between n a r r o w strip m a p s a n d b r o a d e r c o m p r e h e n s i v e m a p s . I n applying his

f i n d i n g s t o h u m a n s , T o l m a n t h e o r i z e d t h a t c o m p r e h e n s i v e m a p s o f o u r social

e n v i r o n m e n t a r e a d v a n t a g e o u s t o h u m a n s , a l t h o u g h narrow, striplike m a p s

c a n lead t o negative h u m a n c o n d i t i o n s , s u c h a s m e n t a l illness o r prejudice

a n d discrimination. His r e a s o n i n g was b a s e d on findings r e l a t e d to t h e studies

Reading 15 Maps in Your Mind 115

described previously indicating that w h e n rats were o v e r m o t i v a t e d (e.g., t o o

h u n g r y ) or o v e r f r u s t r a t e d (e.g., t o o m a n y blind alleys), they t e n d e d to de-

velop very n a r r o w m a p s a n d w e r e less likely to a c q u i r e t h e c o m p r e h e n s i v e

cognitive m a p p i n g skills of t h e rats d e s c r i b e d in his studies. Acknowledging

that he was n o t a clinical or social psychologist, T o l m a n offered this as a possi-

ble e x p l a n a t i o n for s o m e of society's social p r o b l e m s . In T o l m a n ' s words:

Over and over again men are blinded by too violent motivations and too in- tense frustrations into blind . . . haters of outsiders. And the expression of their hates ranges all the way from discrimination against minorities to world conflagrations.

What in the name of Heaven or Psychology can we do about it? My only answer is to preach again the virtue of reason—of, that is, broad cognitive maps. . . . We dare not let ourselves or others become so over-emotional, so hungry, so ill-clad, so over-motivated that only narrow strip-maps will be devel- oped. All of us . . . must be made calm enough and well-fed enough to be able to develop truly comprehensive maps. . . . We must, in short, subject our chil- dren and ourselves (as the kindly experimenter would his rats) to the optimal conditions of moderate motivation and an absence of unnecessary frustrations, whenever we put them and ourselves before that great God-given maze which is our human world, (p. 208)

S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H A N D R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Over the d e c a d e s since Tolman's early studies, a g r e a t deal of r e s e a r c h has sup-

p o r t e d his theories of cognitive learning. P e r h a p s t h e m o s t notable outgrowth

of Tolman's ideas a n d reasoning is the fact that o n e of t h e m o s t active a n d in-

fluential subfields of t h e behavioral sciences today is cognitive psychology. This

b r a n c h of psychology is in the business of studying internal, u n o b s e r v a b l e cog-

nitive processes. Since t h e time only a few d e c a d e s a g o when t h e e n t i r e c o n c e p t

of "mind" was r e j e c t e d as subject m a t t e r for scientific investigation, psychology

has m a d e a nearly c o m p l e t e reversal. Now it is generally a c c e p t e d that t h e way

a stimulus is processed mentally t h r o u g h perceiving, attending, thinking, ex-

pecting, r e m e m b e r i n g , a n d analyzing is at least as i m p o r t a n t in d e t e r m i n i n g a

behavioral response as the stimulus itself, if n o t m o r e so.

T o l m a n ' s t h e o r y o f cognitive m a p p i n g has influenced a n o t h e r a r e a o f

psychology known as environmental psychology. This field is c o n c e r n e d with t h e

relationship between h u m a n b e h a v i o r a n d t h e e n v i r o n m e n t in which it o c -

curs. A key a r e a of r e s e a r c h in e n v i r o n m e n t a l psychology is c o n c e r n e d with

how you e x p e r i e n c e a n d think a b o u t y o u r life's various s u r r o u n d i n g s , such as

y o u r city, y o u r n e i g h b o r h o o d , y o u r s c h o o l c a m p u s , or t h e building in which

you work. T h e study of y o u r c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n s of these places is called

environmental cognition, a n d y o u r precise m e n t a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of t h e m have

b e e n given T o l m a n ' s t e r m , cognitive maps. Using T o l m a n ' s basic c o n c e p t s , en-

v i r o n m e n t a l psychologists have b e e n influential n o t only in o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g

of how p e o p l e u n d e r s t a n d their e n v i r o n m e n t s but also in how e n v i r o n m e n t s

should be designed or a d a p t e d to c r e a t e t h e optimal fit with o u r cognitive

m a p p i n g processes.

116 Chapter ÍV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

O n e of t h e e n v i r o n m e n t a l psychologists who led in applying T o l m a n ' s

ideas t o h u m a n s was L y n c h ( 1 9 6 0 ) . L y n c h p r o p o s e d f i v e c a t e g o r i e s o f envi-

r o n m e n t a l features that we m a k e use of in f o r m i n g o u r cognitive maps. Paths

a r e p e r c e i v e d a r t e r i e s t h a t c a r r y traffic, w h e t h e r it be in cars, on foot, on bicy-

cles, or in boats. Edges a r e b o u n d a r i e s we use in o u r cognitive m a p p i n g to di-

vide o n e a r e a f r o m a n o t h e r , b u t they do n o t function as paths, such as a

c a n y o n , a wall, or t h e s h o r e of a lake. Nodes a r e focal points, such as city parks,

traffic circles, or a fountain, w h e r e paths or e d g e s m e e t . Districts take up l a r g e

spaces o n o u r m e n t a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s a n d a r e defined b y s o m e c o m m o n c h a r -

acteristic, such as t h e t h e a t e r district or r e s t a u r a n t row. Landmarks a r e struc-

t u r e s t h a t a r e used as points of r e f e r e n c e within a m a p a n d a r e usually visible

f r o m a d i s t a n c e , such as a c l o c k tower, a c h u r c h steeple, or a tall or especially

unusual building.

This early article by T o l m a n articulating his t h e o r y of cognitive m a p p i n g

h a s b e e n c i t e d t h r o u g h o u t t h e 5 0 years since its publication consistently a n d

frequently in a wide a r r a y of diverse studies. F o r e x a m p l e , a r e c e n t study ap-

plied T o l m a n ' s m o d e l of cognitive m a p s to u n d e r s t a n d i n g how birds rely on

t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e sun to find l a n d m a r k s a n d c r e a t e cognitive m a p s for their

r e m a r k a b l e m i g r a t o r y treks over h u n d r e d s o r even t h o u s a n d s o f miles e a c h

y e a r ( B i n g m a n & Able, 2 0 0 2 ) . On a different track, a study f r o m t h e field of

t o u r i s m c i t e d T o l m a n ' s ideas in an e x a m i n a t i o n of how travelers in wilderness

a r e a s (nature-based tourists) develop their knowledge of t h e t e r r a i n they a r e ex-

ploring (Young, 1 9 9 9 ) . T h e a u t h o r f o u n d that several factors influenced the

quality o f t h e participants' m e n t a l maps, including m o d e o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ,

w h e t h e r they h a d visited t h e r e g i o n b e f o r e , n u m b e r o f days spent i n t h e a r e a ,

w h e r e they were f r o m , t h e i r a g e , a n d t h e i r g e n d e r .

Today, m u c h of o u r "traveling" d o e s n o t r e q u i r e g o i n g anywhere at all, at

least in a physical sense. We c a n now find o u r way to anywhere in t h e world on

t h e I n t e r n e t . T o l m a n ' s c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of cognitive m a p s has even influ-

e n c e d r e s e a r c h o n t h e psychology o f t h e W o r l d W i d e W e b . I m a g i n e for a m o -

m e n t what you d o w h e n y o u a r e o n t h e I n t e r n e t : you e x p l o r e ; you j u m p f r o m

p l a c e to place; y o u surf; y o u navigate, you g o o g l e . You d o n ' t really go any-

w h e r e geographically, yet you often feel as if you have b e e n on a j o u r n e y . A n d

c h a n c e s a r e , m o s t o f y o u c o u l d probably g o t h e r e again using a p p r o x i m a t e l y

t h e s a m e r o u t e , right? I f so, y o u have f o r m e d a m e n t a l m a p o f a small p a r t o f

t h e W e b . A study in a j o u r n a l d e v o t e d to r e s e a r c h on h u m a n - c o m p u t e r rela-

tionships e x a m i n e d I n t e r n e t s e a r c h b e h a v i o r a n d t h e strategies p e o p l e use t o

navigate t h e W e b ( H o d k i n s o n e t al., 2 0 0 0 ) . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s were able t o

translate W e b s e a r c h behavior i n t o g r a p h i c f o r m , identify individual s e a r c h

strategies, a n d suggest possible m e t h o d s for improving I n t e r n e t s e a r c h effec-

tiveness.

T o l m a n ' s r e s e a r c h was i n c o r p o r a t e d into a study t h a t may have shed

s o m e light on t h a t age-old g e n d e r stereotype: "Men n e v e r ask for directions."

R e s e a r c h by Bell a n d Saucier ( 2 0 0 4 ) e x p l o r e d t h e c o n n e c t i o n between people's

g e n d e r a n d sex h o r m o n e levels with their ability to navigate along a specified

Reading 16 Thanks for the Memories! 117

r o u t e . I m a g i n e for a m o m e n t t h a t you a r e moving a l o n g a p a t h f r o m p o i n t A

to p o i n t B. Along t h e way, you will pick up s o m e m e n t a l i m a g e s of y o u r sur-

r o u n d i n g s , such as n o t a b l e l a n d m a r k s in t h e distance a n d specific points of in-

terest along y o u r r o u t e , a n d you will probably have a g e n e r a l sense of t h e

direction f r o m which you b e g a n y o u r j o u r n e y . I f asked t o p o i n t t o s o m e o f

these m e n t a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , you would likely i n d i c a t e t h e c o r r e c t d i r e c t i o n

for s o m e , but n o t for o t h e r s . In o t h e r words, you would have d e v e l o p e d a cog-

nitive m a p of y o u r r o u t e , b ut it would seldom be p e r f e c t . Bell a n d S a u c i e r

asked participants t o d o j u s t this a n d f o u n d t h a t g r e a t e r levels o f t e s t o s t e r o n e ,

t h e p r i m a r y m a l e sex h o r m o n e , was significantly r e l a t e d t o i n c r e a s e d a c c u r a c y

in these pointing tasks, indicating a c l e a r e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e cognitive

m a p s the participants f o r m e d d u r i n g t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t a l e x p e r i e n c e s . So,

d o e s this m e a n t h a t m e n ask for d i r e c t i o n s less t h a n w o m e n d o b e c a u s e m e n

already know w h e r e they a r e ? N o . As intriguing as these findings a r e , a g r e a t

deal m o r e r e s e a r c h will be n e e d e d to answer that o n e !

Bell, S., & Saucier, D ( 2 0 0 4 ) . Relationship among environmental pointing accuracy, mental rota- tion, sex, and hormones. Environment and Behavior, 5 6 ( 2 ) , 2 5 1 - 2 7 5 .

Bingman, V., & Able, K. ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Maps in birds: Representational mechanisms and neural bases. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 12, 7 4 5 - 7 5 0 .

Hodkinson, C, Kiel, G., & McColl-Kennedy.J. ( 2 0 0 0 ) . Consumer Web search behavior: Diagram- matic illustration of wayfinding on the Web. International fournal of Human-Computer Stud- ies, 5 2 ( 5 ) , 8 0 5 - 8 3 0 .

Lynch, K. ( 1 9 6 0 ) . The image of the dty. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Young, M. ( 1 9 9 9 ) . Cognitive maps of nature-based tourists. Annals of Tourism Research, 2 6 ( 4 ) ,

8 1 7 - 8 3 9 .

Reading 16: THANKS FOR THE MEMORIES! Loftus, E. F. (1975). Leading questions and the eyewitness report. Cognitive

Psychology, 7, 560-572.

P E R R Y MASON:

H A M I L T O N B U R G E R :

P E R R Y MASON:

H A M I L T O N B U R G E R :

H a m i l t o n , I believe that my client is telling t h e

t r u t h w h e n she says she was n o w h e r e n e a r t h e

s c e n e o f t h e c r i m e .

P e r r y , why d o n ' t we let t h e j u r y d e c i d e ?

B e c a u s e , H a m i l t o n , I d o n ' t believe t h e r e is g o i n g

to be a trial. You haven't g o t a c a s e . All y o u have is

circumstantial e v i d e n c e .

Well, P e r r y , I suppose this is as g o o d a time as any

to tell you. We have s o m e o n e w h o saw t h e whole

thing, P e r r y . We have an eyewitness!

And, as t h e mysterious music rises in a c r e s c e n d o , we know that this is going to

b e a n o t h e r difficult case for t h e m o s t victorious T V lawyer o f all time, P e r r y

Mason. Even though we a r e reasonably certain Mason will prevail in t h e e n d ,

the p r e s e n c e of a single eyewitness to the c r i m e has seemingly c h a n g e d a weak

118 Chapter TV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

case into a nearly airtight o n e for the district attorney. Why do people believe that

eyewitness reports provide such strong evidence in criminal cases? T h e reason is

that we tend to believe that the way in which a person r e m e m b e r s an event must

be the way it actually happened. In o t h e r words, m e m o r y is typically thought of as

the replayingoi an event, exacdy as we saw it, like playing a video or DVD. However,

psychologists who study m e m o r y have drawn that notion into question, along with

many o t h e r c o m m o n beliefs about the reliability of h u m a n memory.

O n e of the leading researchers in t h e a r e a of m e m o r y is Elizabeth Loftus at

t h e University of Washington. She has found that when an event is recalled, it is

n o t accurately re-created. Instead, what is recalled is a reconstruction of the actual

event. Loftus's r e s e a r c h has d e m o n s t r a t e d that reconstructive m e m o r y is a result

of o u r use of new a n d existing information to fill in the gaps in o u r recall of an

e x p e r i e n c e . She maintains that m e m o r i e s a r e n o t stable, as we c o m m o n l y be-

lieve, but that they a r e malleable a n d c h a n g e a b l e over time. If you tell s o m e o n e

a story from your vacation 5 years a g o , you think you a r e re-creating the experi-

e n c e just as it h a p p e n e d , but you probably a r e not. Instead, you have recon-

structed the m e m o r y using information from many sources, such as the previous

times you've told it, o t h e r e x p e r i e n c e s from the same or later vacations, perhaps

a movie you saw last year that was shot in a place similar to your vacation, a n d so

on. You know this is t r u e if you and a person who was with you at the time have

ever r e c o u n t e d your shared e x p e r i e n c e . You a r e often surprised by how your sto-

ries c a n totally disagree about an event you b o t h e x p e r i e n c e d simultaneously!

Usually, these alterations in m e m o r y a r e n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n interesting

a n d harmless. However, in legal p r o c e e d i n g s , when a defendant's fate may rest

o n t h e testimony o f a n eyewitness, m e m o r y r e c o n s t r u c t i o n s c a n b e critical. F o r

this r e a s o n , m u c h o f Loftus's r e s e a r c h i n t h e a r e a o f m e m o r y has b e e n c o n -

n e c t e d to legal eyewitness testimony. In h e r early r e s e a r c h , she found that very

subde influences in how a question is w o r d e d c a n alter a person's m e m o r y for

an event. F o r e x a m p l e , if witnesses to an a u t o m o b i l e a c c i d e n t a r e asked "Did

you see a b r o k e n headlight?" or "Did you see t h e b r o k e n headlight?" t h e ques-

tion using t h e word the p r o d u c e d m o r e "yes" responses t h a n the question using

t h e w o r d a, even when no headlight h a d b e e n b r o k e n . T h e use of the presup-

poses (assumes) the p r e s e n c e of a b r o k e n headlight, a n d this, in t u r n , causes

m a n y witnesses to a d d o n e to their m e m o r i e s as they r e c o n s t r u c t t h e event.

T h e article by Loftus t h a t is t h e focus of this discussion is o n e of t h e m o s t

often c i t e d b e c a u s e it r e p o r t s on four r e l a t e d studies t h a t t o o k h e r t h e o r y a

m a j o r step forward. I n these studies, she d e m o n s t r a t e d that t h e m e r e wording

o f questions asked o f eyewitnesses c o u l d alter t h e i r m e m o r i e s o f events when

they w e r e l a t e r asked o t h e r questions a b o u t t h e events. This r e s e a r c h influ-

e n c e d b o t h m e m o r y t h e o r y a n d c r i m i n a l law.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

T h e s e studies focus on t h e p o w e r of questions c o n t a i n i n g presuppositions t o

alter a person's m e m o r y of an event. Loftus defines a presupposition as a c o n -

dition that must be t r u e for t h e question to m a k e sense. F o r e x a m p l e , suppose

Reading 16 Thanks for the Memories! 119

you have witnessed an a u t o m o b i l e a c c i d e n t a n d I ask you "How m a n y p e o p l e

were in the c a r that was speeding?" T h e question presupposes t h a t t h e c a r was

speeding. B u t what if t h e c a r was n o t actually speeding? You m i g h t answer t h e

question anyway b e c a u s e it was n o t a question a b o u t t h e speed of t h e c a r — i t

was a b o u t its passengers. Loftus p r o p o s e d , however, that b e c a u s e of t h e way t h e

question was w o r d e d , you m i g h t a d d t h e speeding i n f o r m a t i o n to y o u r m e m -

o r y of t h e event. Consequently, if you a r e asked o t h e r questions later, y o u will

be m o r e likely to say t h e c a r was speeding. Loftus hypothesized t h a t if eyewit-

nesses a r e asked questions that c o n t a i n a false presupposition a b o u t t h e wit-

nessed event, the new false i n f o r m a t i o n may be i n c o r p o r a t e d into t h e witness's

m e m o r y of the event a n d a p p e a r subsequently in new testimony by t h e witness.

M E T H O D A N D R E S U L T S

T h e m e t h o d s a n d results for e a c h o f t h e four e x p e r i m e n t s r e p o r t s a r e sum-

marized in t h e following subsections.

Experiment 1

In t h e first study, 1 5 0 participants in small g r o u p s saw a film of a five-car c h a i n -

r e a c t i o n a c c i d e n t t h a t o c c u r r e d w h e n a driver r a n t h r o u g h a stop sign i n t o o n -

c o m i n g traffic. T h e a c c i d e n t t o o k only 4 s e c o n d s a n d t h e e n t i r e film r a n less

than a m i n u t e . After t h e film, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e given a q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n -

taining 10 questions. F o r h a l f of t h e participants, t h e first question was "How

fast was C a r A [ t h e c a r t h a t r a n t h e stop sign] g o i n g w h e n it r a n t h e stop sign?"

F o r t h e o t h e r h a l f of t h e participants, t h e question was "How fast was C a r A

going when i t t u r n e d right?" T h e r e m a i n i n g questions were o f litde interest t o

t h e r e s e a r c h e r s until t h e last o n e , which was t h e s a m e for b o t h g r o u p s : "Did

you see a stop sign for C a r A?"

In the g r o u p that h a d b e e n asked a b o u t t h e stop sign, 40 participants

( 5 3 % ) said they saw a stop sign for C a r A, while only 26 ( 3 5 % ) in t h e "turned-

right" g r o u p claimed to have seen it. This difference was statistically significant.

Experiment 2

T h e s e c o n d study Loftus r e p o r t e d was t h e first in this series to involve a d e -

layed m e m o r y test a n d was t h e only o n e o f t h e four n o t t o use a n a u t o m o b i l e

a c c i d e n t as t h e witnessed event. F o r this study, 40 p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e shown a

3-minute s e g m e n t f r o m t h e film Diary of a Student Revolution. T h e clip showed

a class being d i s r u p t e d by eight antiwar d e m o n s t r a t o r s . After they viewed t h e

film, t h e participants were given q u e s t i o n n a i r e s c o n t a i n i n g 20 questions relat-

ing to t h e film clip. H a l f of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s were asked "Was t h e l e a d e r of t h e

four d e m o n s t r a t o r s w h o e n t e r e d t h e c l a s s r o o m a m a l e ? " T h e o t h e r h a l f w e r e

asked "Was t h e l e a d e r of t h e twelve d e m o n s t r a t o r s w h o e n t e r e d t h e c l a s s r o o m

a male?" All r e m a i n i n g questions were identical for t h e two g r o u p s .

O n e week after this initial test, t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s f r o m b o t h g r o u p s r e -

t u r n e d a n d answered 20 new questions a b o u t t h e film (without seeing it

120 Chapter PV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

a g a i n ) . T h e o n e question t h a t provided t h e results of t h e study was "How

m a n y d e m o n s t r a t o r s did y o u see e n t e r i n g t h e classroom?" R e m e m b e r , b o t h

g r o u p s o f p a r t i c i p a n t s saw t h e s a m e f i l m a n d answered t h e s a m e questions, ex-

c e p t for t h e r e f e r e n c e to 12 versus 4 d e m o n s t r a t o r s .

T h e g r o u p that h a d received t h e question presupposing 1 2 d e m o n s t r a -

tors r e p o r t e d seeing a n a v e r a g e o f 8 . 8 5 . T h o s e w h o h a d received t h e question

asking a b o u t 4 d e m o n s t r a t o r s a v e r a g e d 6 . 4 0 . This was also a significant differ-

e n c e . T h i s e x p e r i m e n t showed that, o n a v e r a g e , t h e wording o f o n e question

a l t e r e d t h e way p a r t i c i p a n t s r e m e m b e r e d t h e basic characteristics of a wit-

nessed event.

Experiment 3

T h i s third e x p e r i m e n t was designed to see if a false presupposition i n h e r e n t

in a question c o u l d c a u s e witnesses to r e c o n s t r u c t their m e m o r y of an event to

i n c l u d e objects that, i n reality, were n o t t h e r e . T h e participants ( 1 5 0 univer-

sity students) w a t c h e d a s h o r t video of an a c c i d e n t involving a white sports c a r

a n d t h e n answered 1 0 questions a b o u t t h e c o n t e n t o f t h e video. O n e question

i n c l u d e d for only half t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s was "How fast was t h e white sports c a r

g o i n g when it passed the barn while traveling along t h e c o u n t r y r o a d ? " T h e

o t h e r h a l f of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e asked "How fast was t h e white sports c a r

g o i n g while traveling a l o n g t h e c o u n t r y r o a d ? " As in t h e previous study, t h e

p a r t i c i p a n t s r e t u r n e d a week l a t e r a n d answered 10 new questions a b o u t t h e

a c c i d e n t . T h e question u n d e r study was "Did you see a b a r n ? "

Of t h o s e participants w h o h a d previously answered a question in which a

b a r n was m e n t i o n e d , 13 ( 1 7 . 3 % ) of t h e m answered "yes" to t h e test question,

c o m p a r e d with only 2 ( 2 . 7 % ) in t h e n o - b a r n g r o u p . O n c e again, this was a sta-

tistically significant difference.

Experiment 4

T h e f i n a l e x p e r i m e n t r e p o r t e d i n this a r t i c l e was s o m e w h a t m o r e elabo-

rately d e s i g n e d t o m e e t two goals. First, L o f t u s w a n t e d t o f u r t h e r d e m o n -

s t r a t e t h e m e m o r y r e c o n s t r u c t i o n effects f o u n d i n E x p e r i m e n t 3 . S e c o n d ,

s h e w o n d e r e d i f p e r h a p s j u s t t h e m e n t i o n o f a n o b j e c t , even i f i t was n o t in-

c l u d e d a s p a r t o f a false p r e s u p p o s i t i o n , m i g h t b e e n o u g h t o c a u s e t h e ob-

j e c t t o b e a d d e d t o m e m o r y . F o r e x a m p l e , i m a g i n e y o u a r e asked directly

"Did y o u see a b a r n ? " w h e n no b a r n was d e p i c t e d in t h e film. You will p r o b -

ably answer "no." B u t if you a r e asked a g a i n a week later, m i g h t t h a t b a r n

h a v e c r e p t i n t o y o u r m e m o r y o f t h e event? T h i s i s what L o f t u s tested i n t h e

f o u r t h e x p e r i m e n t .

T h r e e g r o u p s of 50 p a r t i c i p a n t s viewed a 3-minute film s h o t f r o m the in-

side of a c a r t h a t e n d s with t h e c a r colliding with a baby c a r r i a g e p u s h e d by a

m a n . T h e t h r e e g r o u p s t h e n r e c e i v e d booklets c o n t a i n i n g questions a b o u t t h e

film. T h e s e booklets differed as follows:

Group D : T h e d i r e c t q u e s t i o n g r o u p r e c e i v e d b o o k l e t s c o n t a i n i n g

4 0 "filler" q u e s t i o n s a n d 5 key q u e s t i o n s d i r e c t l y asking a b o u t

Reading 16 Thanks for the Memories! 121

TABLE 16-1 Appearance of Nonexistent Objects in Participants' Recall of Filmed Accident Following Direct Questions and False Presuppositions

PERCENT OF "YES- RESPONSES TO DIRECT QUESTION 1 WEEK LATER BY GROUP

DIRECT QUESTION FALSE PRESUPPOSITION D C F

C = control group D = direct-question group F = false-presupposition group (From p. 568.)

n o n e x i s t e n t o b j e c t s — f o r e x a m p l e , "Did y o u see a b a r n in t h e film?"

( s e e T a b l e 1 6 - 1 ) .

Group F: T h e false presupposition g r o u p received t h e s a m e 40 filler ques-

tions a n d 5 key questions that c o n t a i n e d presuppositions a b o u t t h e s a m e

n o n e x i s t e n t objects, such as, "Did you see a station w a g o n p a r k e d in

f r o n t o f t h e b a r n ? "

Group C: T h e c o n t r o l g r o u p received only t h e 40 filler questions.

O n e week l a t e r all t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s r e t u r n e d a n d a n s w e r e d 2 0 new

questions a b o u t t h e f i l m . O f t h e q u e s t i o n s , 5 w e r e t h e e x a c t s a m e key ques-

tions as w e r e asked of t h e d i r e c t - q u e s t i o n g r o u p a week b e f o r e . S o , g r o u p D

saw t h o s e 5 q u e s t i o n s twice. T h e d e p e n d e n t m e a s u r e ( t h e r e s u l t ) was t h e

p e r c e n t a g e o f p a r t i c i p a n t s i n e a c h g r o u p w h o c l a i m e d t o r e m e m b e r t h e

n o n e x i s t e n t objects.

Table 16-1 s u m m a r i z e s t h e findings for all t h r e e g r o u p s . R e m e m b e r , t h e

f i l m i n c l u d e d n o school bus, t r u c k , c e n t e r line o n t h e r o a d , w o m a n pushing

the c a r r i a g e , o r b a r n . C o m b i n i n g all t h e questions, t h e overall p e r c e n t a g e s o f

those participants answering "yes" to t h e d i r e c t questions 1 week l a t e r w e r e

2 9 . 2 % for t h e false-presupposition g r o u p , 1 5 . 6 % for t h e direct-question

g r o u p , a n d 8 . 4 % for t h e c o n t r o l g r o u p . T h e differences between t h e direct-

question g r o u p a n d t h e false-presupposition g r o u p for e a c h item, as well as

for all t h e items c o m b i n e d , were statistically significant.

122 Chapter IV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

D I S C U S S I O N

B a s e d o n these a n d o t h e r studies, Loftus a r g u e d t h a t a n a c c u r a t e t h e o r y o f

m e m o r y a n d recall m u s t i n c l u d e a p r o c e s s of r e c o n s t r u c t i o n when new infor-

m a t i o n i s i n t e g r a t e d i n t o t h e original m e m o r y o f a n event. T h e findings o f

these studies c a n n o t be e x p l a i n e d by assuming t h a t recall simply involves a

m e n t a l replaying of an event, even with varying d e g r e e s of accuracy. To illus-

t r a t e , F i g u r e 16-1 c o m p a r e s t h e traditional view of recall with t h e r e f o r m u -

lated p r o c e s s p r o p o s e d b y Loftus. A s y o u c a n see, t h e e x t r a step o f integrating

new i n f o r m a t i o n i n t o m e m o r y has b e e n a d d e d . This new i n f o r m a t i o n , i n

t u r n , causes y o u r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f t h e original m e m o r y t o b e a l t e r e d o r rec-

onstructed. L a t e r , if y o u a r e asked a question a b o u t t h e event, y o u r recall will

n o t b e o f t h e a c t u a l original event but, r a t h e r , y o u r r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f it. Loftus

c o n t e n d e d t h a t this r e c o n s t r u c t i o n p r o c e s s was t h e r e a s o n that b a r n s , school

busses, trucks, w o m e n pushing baby c a r r i a g e s , a n d c e n t e r lines in r o a d s were

all c o n j u r e d u p i n p a r t i c i p a n t s ' m e m o r i e s w h e n they were n o t p a r t o f t h e orig-

inal e x p e r i e n c e . T h e false presupposition in t h e questions provided new in-

FIGURE 16-1 Recall of an event in response to a question.

Reading 16 Thanks for the Memories! 123

f o r m a t i o n that was unintentionally i n t e g r a t e d into t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' m e m o r i e s

o f t h e event.

Applying this idea to eyewitnesses in c r i m i n a l investigations, Loftus

p o i n t e d o u t that witnesses t o a c r i m e a r e often q u e s t i o n e d m o r e t h a n o n c e .

T h e y might b e asked questions b y police a t t h e s c e n e o f t h e c r i m e , inter-

viewed by t h e p r o s e c u t i n g a t t o r n e y assigned to t h e c a s e , a n d again q u e s t i o n e d

in c o u r t . During these various question-and-answer sessions, it is n o t unlikely

t h a t false presuppositions will be m a d e , possibly unintentionally, in n u m e r o u s

ways. C o m m o n , i n n o c e n t - s o u n d i n g questions such as "What did t h e guy's g u n

look like?" or "Where was t h e getaway c a r p a r k e d ? " have b e e n shown to in-

c r e a s e t h e c h a n c e s t h a t witnesses will r e m e m b e r a g u n or a getaway c a r

w h e t h e r or n o t those items were actually t h e r e (Smith & Ellsworth, 1 9 8 7 ) . Al-

t h o u g h t h e attorneys, t h e j u d g e , a n d t h e j u r y a r e making t h e assumption t h a t

the witness is re-creating what was actually seen, Loftus c o n t e n d s t h a t what is

being r e m e m b e r e d by t h e witness is a " r e g e n e r a t e d i m a g e based on t h e al-

t e r e d m e m o r i a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n " ( p . 5 7 1 ) .

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Several studies r e p r e s e n t t h e o n g o i n g influence of Loftus's impressive body of

work on eyewitness testimony. O n e study citing h e r 1 9 7 5 article e x a m i n e d how

lawyers' c o m p l i c a t e d questions negatively affect eyewitness a c c u r a c y a n d confi-

d e n c e (Kebbell & Giles, 2 0 0 0 ) . All participants w a t c h e d identical v i d e o t a p e d

events a n d were questioned a week later a b o u t what they saw. H a l f t h e partici-

pants were asked questions in confusing language (you know, that lawyer-speak

of "Is it n o t t r u e that . . . ?"), while o t h e r s were asked t h e s a m e questions in

simple language. T h e results were clear: the participants receiving t h e confus-

ing f o r m of the questions were less a c c u r a t e in t h e i r eyewitness r e p o r t s a n d

were also less confident of their answers than those in t h e straightforward-

question condition. O t h e r r e s e a r c h has d e m o n s t r a t e d that when eyewitnesses

a r e shown m o r e than o n e p h o t o g r a p h i c lineup o f criminal suspects ( a c o m -

m o n event in law e n f o r c e m e n t ) , their a c c u r a c y in identifying t h e c o r r e c t per-

p e t r a t o r decreases significantly as they i n c o r p o r a t e the newer faces into their

r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of the original event (Pezdek & Blandon-Gitlin, 2 0 0 5 ) .

A n o t h e r intriguing study applied Loftus's work to r e p o r t s of "fantastic

m e m o r i e s , " that is, m e m o r i e s that b e a r g r e a t e r similarity to fantasy t h a n real-

ity, such as alien a b d u c t i o n s , out-of-body e x p e r i e n c e s , e x t r a s e n s o r y p e r c e p -

tion ( E S P ) events, e n c o u n t e r s with ghosts, a n d s o o n ( F r e n c h , 2 0 0 3 ) . Clearly,

i f these r e p o r t s o f m e m o r i e s were t r u e , they would provide p r o o f that these

p a r a n o r m a l o c c u r r e n c e s a r e real. However, r e s e a r c h tells us time a n d time

again t h a t such events have never b e e n scientifically d e m o n s t r a t e d . So, what

a c c o u n t s for t h e m e m o r i e s ? T h e answer may lie in t h e fallibility a n d unrelia-

bility of h u m a n m e m o r y as discussed in this r e a d i n g a n d , p e r h a p s , t h e ability

of o u r brains to create m e m o r i e s of events that never actually h a p p e n e d . As

F r e n c h points out, "A n u m b e r of psychological variables that have b e e n

124 Chapter TV Intelligence, Cognition, and Memory

shown to c o r r e l a t e with susceptibility to false m e m o r i e s (e.g., hypnotic sus-

ceptibility, t e n d e n c y to dissociate, e t c . ) also c o r r e l a t e with t h e t e n d e n c y to re-

p o r t p a r a n o r m a l e x p e r i e n c e s " ( F r e n c h , p . 1 5 3 ) .

In addition to h e r o n g o i n g work in t h e a r e a of eyewitness testimony, Eliz-

a b e t h Loftus is c u r r e n d y o n e of t h e leading e x p e r t s in t h e h e a t e d controversy

o v e r r e p r e s s e d c h i l d h o o d m e m o r i e s . O n o n e side o f this d e b a t e a r e those p e o -

ple w h o claim to have b e e n a b u s e d sexually s o m e t i m e in t h e i r past but who

have only r e c e n d y , often with t h e h e l p of a therapist, r e m e m b e r e d t h e abuse.

T h e usual e x p l a n a t i o n for t h e sudden recall o f these victims assumes that t h e

t r a u m a t i c m e m o r i e s have b e e n r e p r e s s e d in t h e u n c o n s c i o u s a n d have only

r e c e n d y b e e n revealed. O n t h e o t h e r side a r e those who a r e suddenly a c c u s e d

o f t h e abuse b u t w h o categorically deny i t a n d claim that these m e m o r i e s a r e

p u r e fantasy o r have b e e n s o m e h o w i m p l a n t e d d u r i n g t h e r a p y (see G a r r y &

Loftus, 1 9 9 4 , for a review of this c o n t r o v e r s y ) . This falls squarely into t h e a r e a

o f Loftus's m e m o r y r e s e a r c h .

Loftus's b o o k The Myth of Repressed Memories: False Memories and Allegations

of Sexual Abuse (Loftus & K e t c h a m , 1 9 9 4 ) s u m m a r i z e d h e r findings in this a r e a

a n d c o m b i n e d t h e m into a cohesive a r g u m e n t . Loftus c o n t e n d s , a n d a p p e a r s

to have d e m o n s t r a t e d in n u m e r o u s studies, that r e p r e s s e d m e m o r i e s simply

do n o t exist. In fact, she is at t h e f o r e f r o n t of psychologists w h o question t h e

e n t i r e n o t i o n a n d e x i s t e n c e o f a n u n c o n s c i o u s . A m a i n f e a t u r e o f Loftus's ar-

g u m e n t is t h a t e x p e r i m e n t a l e v i d e n c e r e p e a t e d l y d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t especially

t r a u m a t i c m e m o r i e s t e n d to be t h e o n e s we r e m e m b e r best. A n d yet, clinicians

often r e p o r t these instances o f r e p r e s s e d m e m o r i e s o f sexual abuse that rise t o

t h e s u r f a c e d u r i n g specific a n d intense f o r m s of therapy. H o w c a n these two

seemingly o p p o s i n g views be r e c o n c i l e d ? Loftus suggests t h r e e possible m e m -

o r y distortions t h a t m i g h t e x p l a i n what clinicians see as repression (Loftus,

J o s l y n , & P o l a g e , 1 9 9 8 ) . First, early sexual abuse may simply be f o r g o t t e n , n o t

r e p r e s s e d . She cites r e s e a r c h d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h a t when c h i l d r e n d o n o t un-

d e r s t a n d t h e sexual n a t u r e of an abusive event, it tends to be r e m e m b e r e d

poorly. S e c o n d , it is possible that p e o p l e in therapy say they h a d no m e m o r y

of a t r a u m a t i c event, but, in reality, they never actually f o r g o t it. Avoiding

thinking a b o u t s o m e t h i n g is different t h a n forgetting it. A n d third, Loftus

c o n t e n d s t h a t s o m e "people may believe that a p a r t i c u l a r t r a u m a t i c event o c -

c u r r e d a n d was r e p r e s s e d when, in fact, it did n o t h a p p e n in t h e first place.

U n d e r s o m e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , s o m e c o m b i n a t i o n o f these distortions c o u l d lead

t o situations t h a t a r e i n t e r p r e t e d a s repression" (p. 7 8 1 ) .

You c a n i m a g i n e t h a t Loftus's position o n r e p r e s s e d a n d r e c o v e r e d

m e m o r i e s is n o t without critics (e.g., Spitzer & Avis, 2 0 0 6 ; Steinberg, 2 0 0 0 ) .

After all, h e r r e j e c t i o n o f t h e p o w e r o f repression i s o p p o s e d t o c o m m o n l y

held beliefs a b o u t psychology a n d p s y c h o t h e r a p y that have b e e n a r o u n d since

F r e u d . Moreover, m a n y therapists a n d victims have a very p e r s o n a l stake in

t h e i r belief t h a t m e m o r i e s o f abuse c a n b e r e p r e s s e d for years a n d later recov-

e r e d . However, a careful r e a d i n g of Loftus's t h o r o u g h a n d careful scientific

work should c a u s e a n y o n e to question this belief.

Reading 16 Thanks for the Memories! 125

C O N C L U S I O N

Elizabeth Loftus is c o n s i d e r e d by m o s t to be t h e leading r e s e a r c h e r in t h e

areas o f m e m o r y r e c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d eyewitness inaccuracy. H e r r e s e a r c h i n

these a r e a s c o n t i n u e s . H e r findings over t h e years have held up quite well to

challenges a n d have b e e n s u p p o r t e d by o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s in t h e field.

Little d o u b t exists within t h e psychological a n d legal professions today

that eyewitness r e p o r t s a r e subject t o m a n y s o u r c e s o f e r r o r such a s postevent

information integration. B e c a u s e o f t h e body o f r e s e a r c h b y Loftus a n d oth-

ers, t h e power a n d reliability of eyewitnesses in judicial p r o c e e d i n g s a r e now

justifiably questioned. Loftus has b e e n o n e of t h e m o s t sought-after e x p e r t wit-

nesses (usual'y for t h e defense) to d e m o n s t r a t e to j u r i e s t h e c a r e they m u s t

use when evaluating t h e testimony of eyewitnesses.

As Loftus herself s u m m a r i z e s in h e r 1 9 9 4 book, "I study m e m o r y a n d I

am a skeptic" (Loftus 8c K e t c h a m , 1 9 9 4 , p. 7 ) . P e r h a p s we all should be.

French, C. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Fantastic memories: T h e relevance of research into eyewitness testimony and false memories for reports of anomalous experiences. Journal of Consáousness Studies, 10, 1 5 3 - 1 7 4 .

Garry, M., & Loftus, E. ( 1 9 9 4 ) . Repressed memories of childhood trauma: Could some of them be suggested? USA Today Magazine, 122, 8 2 - 8 5 .

Kebbell, M., & Giles, C. ( 2 0 0 0 ) . Some experimental influences of lawyers' complicated questions on eyewitness confidence and accuracy. Journal of Psychology, 134(2), 1 2 9 - 1 3 9 .

Loftus, E., Joslyn, S., & Polage, D. ( 1 9 9 8 ) . Repression: A mistaken impression? Development and Psychopathobgy, 10(4), 7 8 1 - 7 9 2 .

Loftus, E., & Ketcham, K. ( 1 9 9 4 ) . The myth of repressed memories: False accusations and allegations of sexual abuse. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Pezdek, K, & Blandon-Gitlin, I. ( 2 0 0 5 ) . When is an intervening line-up most likely to affect eye- witness identification accuracy? Legal and Criminological Psychology, 10(2), 2 4 7 - 2 6 3 .

Smith, V., & Ellsworth, P. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . The social psychology of eyewitness accuracy: Leading questions and communicator expertise. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 2 9 4 - 3 0 0 .

Spitzer, B., & Avis, J.M. ( 2 0 0 6 ) . Recounting graphic sexual abuse memories in therapy: The im- pact on women's healing. Journal of Family Violence2\(3), 1 7 3 - 1 8 4 .

Steinberg, M. ( 2 0 0 0 ) . The stranger in the mirror. Psychology Today, 33, 34.

HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

R e a d i n g 1 7 D I S C O V E R I N G L O V E

R e a d i n g 1 8 O U T O F S I G H T , B U T NOT O U T O F M I N D

R e a d i n g 1 9 H O W M O R A L A R E Y O U ?

R e a d i n g 2 0 I N C O N T R O L A N D G L A D O F IT!

Th e h u m a n d e v e l o p m e n t b r a n c h o f psychology i s c o n c e r n e d with t h e c o m -p l e x set o f d e v e l o p m e n t a l c h a n g e s virtually e v e r y o n e g o e s t h r o u g h f r o m birth to d e a t h . It is o n e of t h e largest a n d m o s t c o m p l e x specialties in t h e be-

havioral sciences. A l t h o u g h we g r o w up to be u n i q u e individuals, a g r e a t deal

o f o u r d e v e l o p m e n t i s similar a n d p r e d i c t a b l e a n d o c c u r s a c c o r d i n g t o c e r t a i n

relatively fixed schedules. I n c l u d e d a m o n g t h e m o s t influential a r e a s o f r e -

s e a r c h i n d e v e l o p m e n t a l psychology a r e t h e processes o f a t t a c h m e n t o r b o n d -

ing between infant a n d m o t h e r , t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f intellectual abilities, a n d

t h e c h a n g e s relating t o t h e aging process.

S o m e of t h e m o s t famous a n d influential r e s e a r c h ever c o n d u c t e d in psy-

c h o l o g y is discussed in this section. H a r r y Harlow's work with monkeys

d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e of early infant a t t a c h m e n t s in later psychologi-

cal adjustment. T h e sweeping discoveries o f J e a n Piaget f o r m e d t h e e n t i r e

foundation of what we know today a b o u t cognitive development; a small sam-

ple of his r e s e a r c h is included h e r e in detail so that you may glimpse t h e inge-

nuity of his m e t h o d s a n d clarity of his r e p o r t e d findings. N e x t is a famous body

o f r e s e a r c h b y L a w r e n c e Kohlberg focusing o n how m o r a l c h a r a c t e r develops

a n d why s o m e p e o p l e a p p e a r to behave at a h i g h e r m o r a l level than o t h e r s . In

addition, b e c a u s e h u m a n d e v e l o p m e n t is a lifelong process, a discussion of t h e

well-known article by Ellen L a n g e r a n d J u d i t h Rodin (often r e f e r r e d to as "the

plant study") is i n c l u d e d to illustrate how e v e r y o n e , no m a t t e r their stage in

life, n e e d s to feel in c o n t r o l of their own c h o i c e s , activities, a n d destinies.

Reading 17: DISCOVERING LOVE Harlow, H. F. (1958). The nature of love. American Psychologist, 13, 673-685.

S o m e t i m e s you may think, t h a t r e s e a r c h psychologists have g o n e t o o far. H o w

c a n s o m e t h i n g such as love be studied scientifically? H o w e v e r you define love,

126

Reading 17 Discovering Love 127

you'll have to a g r e e t h a t it e x e r t s a g r e a t deal of influence o v e r h u m a n behav-

ior. It follows t h e n t h a t psychologists would have to be i n t e r e s t e d in what love

is, where it c o m e s f r o m , a n d how it works.

H a r r y Harlow ( 1 9 0 6 - 1 9 8 1 ) , a d e v e l o p m e n t a l psychologist, is c o n s i d e r e d

by many to have m a d e t h e greatest c o n t r i b u t i o n since F r e u d in studying how

o u r early life e x p e r i e n c e s affect a d u l t h o o d . Most psychologists a g r e e t h a t y o u r

e x p e r i e n c e s as an infant with closeness, t o u c h i n g , a n d a t t a c h m e n t to y o u r

m o t h e r ( o r o t h e r p r i m a r y caregiver) have a n i m p o r t a n t influence o n y o u r abil-

ities to love a n d be close to o t h e r s later in life. If you think a b o u t it, what was

your first e x p e r i e n c e with love? F o r m o s t of you, it was t h e b o n d between y o u

a n d your m o t h e r beginning a t t h e m o m e n t o f y o u r birth. B u t what e x a c d y was

it a b o u t that c o n n e c t i o n that was so crucial? T h e F r e u d i a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n was

that it was the focus a r o u n d t h e i m p o r t a n c e of t h e breast a n d t h e instinctive

oral, feeding t e n d e n c i e s during t h e first year of life ( F r e u d ' s oral stage). L a t e r ,

the behavioral school c o u n t e r e d that notion with t h e view that all h u m a n be-

havior is associated with t h e situation in which it o c c u r s a n d its c o n s e q u e n c e s .

B e c a u s e the m o t h e r can fill an infant's basic needs, t h e infant's closeness to

h e r is constantly r e i n f o r c e d by t h e fact that she provides food a n d c a r e for t h e

infant. Consequently, t h e m o t h e r b e c o m e s associated in t h e infant's m i n d with

pleasurable events a n d , t h e r e f o r e , this thing we call "love" develops. In b o t h of

these conceptualizations, love was seen as developing from o t h e r instinctive or

survival needs. However, Harlow discovered t h a t love a n d affection may be

built-in basic n e e d s that a r e j u s t as strong as or even s t r o n g e r t h a n those of

h u n g e r o r thirst.

O n e way to begin to u n c o v e r t h e c o m p o n e n t s of t h e love between an in-

fant a n d m o t h e r would be to p l a c e infants in situations w h e r e t h e m o t h e r

does n o t provide for all o f t h e infant's n e e d s a n d w h e r e various c o m p o n e n t s

o f t h e e n v i r o n m e n t c a n b e scientifically m a n i p u l a t e d . A c c o r d i n g t o previous

theories, w e should b e able t o p r e v e n t o r c h a n g e t h e quality a n d s t r e n g t h o f

the b o n d f o r m e d between t h e infant a n d m o t h e r b y altering t h e m o t h e r ' s

ability to m e e t t h e infant's p r i m a r y n e e d s . F o r ethical r e a s o n s , however, such

r e s e a r c h c a n n o t b e d o n e o n h u m a n s . B e c a u s e H a r l o w h a d b e e n working with

rhesus monkeys for several years in his studies of learning, it was a simple

process to begin his studies of love a n d a t t a c h m e n t with these subjects. Bio-

logically, rhesus monkeys a r e very similar to h u m a n s . H a r l o w also believed

that the basic responses of t h e rhesus m o n k e y relating to b o n d i n g a n d affec-

tion in infancy (such as nursing, c o n t a c t , clinging, e t c . ) a r e t h e s a m e for t h e

two species. W h e t h e r such r e s e a r c h with n o n h u m a n subjects is ethical is ad-

dressed later in this section.

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

In Harlow's e a r l i e r studies, infant m o n k e y s were raised carefully by h u m a n s in

the l a b o r a t o r y so that they c o u l d receive well-balanced nutritional diets a n d

be p r o t e c t e d f r o m disease m o r e effectively t h a n if they were raised by t h e i r

128 Chapter V Human Development

m o n k e y m o t h e r s . H a r l o w n o t i c e d t h a t these infant monkeys b e c a m e very at-

t a c h e d t o t h e c l o t h p a d s ( c o t t o n d i a p e r s ) that w e r e used t o c o v e r t h e b o t t o m s

o f t h e i r c a g e s . T h e y would cling t o these pads a n d would b e c o m e e x t r e m e l y

a n g r y a n d agitated w h e n t h e p a d s w e r e r e m o v e d for cleaning. This a t t a c h -

m e n t was o b s e r v e d in t h e baby monkeys as y o u n g as 1 day old a n d b e c a m e

s t r o n g e r o v e r t h e monkeys' first several m o n t h s of life. Apparendy, as Harlow

states, "The baby, h u m a n or monkey, if it is to survive, must c l u t c h at m o r e

t h a n a straw" ( p . 6 7 5 ) . If a baby m o n k e y was in a c a g e without this soft cover-

ing, it would thrive v e r y p o o r l y even t h o u g h it r e c e i v e d c o m p l e t e nutritional

a n d m e d i c a l c a r e . W h e n t h e c l o t h was i n t r o d u c e d , t h e infant would b e c o m e

h e a l t h i e r a n d seemingly c o n t e n t . T h e r e f o r e , H a r l o w t h e o r i z e d t h a t these in-

fant m o n k e y s m u s t have s o m e basic n e e d for close c o n t a c t with s o m e t h i n g soft

a n d c o m f o r t i n g in addition to p r i m a r y biological n e e d s such as h u n g e r a n d

thirst. To test this theory, H a r l o w a n d his associates d e c i d e d to "build" differ-

e n t kinds o f e x p e r i m e n t a l , s u r r o g a t e m o n k e y m o t h e r s .

M E T H O D

T h e first s u r r o g a t e m o t h e r they built consisted of a s m o o t h w o o d e n body cov-

e r e d in s p o n g e r u b b e r a n d t e r r y c l o t h . It was e q u i p p e d with a breast-like struc-

t u r e in t h e c h e s t a r e a t h a t delivered milk, a n d t h e body c o n t a i n e d a light bulb

inside to give off w a r m t h . T h e y t h e n c o n s t r u c t e d a different kind of s u r r o g a t e

m o t h e r t h a t was less able to provide soft c o m f o r t . This m o t h e r was m a d e of

wire m e s h s h a p e d a b o u t t h e s a m e as t h e w o o d e n f r a m e , so that an infant m o n -

key c o u l d cling to it as to t h e c l o t h m o t h e r . This wire m o t h e r c a m e e q u i p p e d

with a working nursing breast device a n d also was able to provide w a r m t h . In

o t h e r words, t h e wire m o t h e r was identical to t h e c l o t h m o t h e r in every way

e x c e p t for t h e ability to offer what H a r l o w called contact comfort.

T h e s e m a n u f a c t u r e d m o t h e r s w e r e t h e n p l a c e d i n s e p a r a t e cubicles

t h a t w e r e a t t a c h e d t o t h e infant m o n k e y s ' living c a g e . E i g h t infant m o n k e y s

w e r e r a n d o m l y assigned t o two g r o u p s . F o r o n e g r o u p , t h e c l o t h m o t h e r was

e q u i p p e d with t h e f e e d e r ( a n u r s i n g b o t t l e ) t o provide milk, a n d for t h e

o t h e r g r o u p , t h e wire m o t h e r was t h e milk provider. I ' m sure you c a n already

see w h a t H a r l o w was testing h e r e . He was a t t e m p t i n g to s e p a r a t e t h e influ-

e n c e o f feeding f r o m t h e influence o f c o n t a c t c o m f o r t o n t h e monkeys' be-

havior t o w a r d t h e m o t h e r . T h e m o n k e y s w e r e t h e n p l a c e d i n t h e i r c a g e s a n d

t h e a m o u n t o f t i m e they s p e n t i n d i r e c t c o n t a c t with e a c h m o t h e r was

r e c o r d e d for t h e first 5 m o n t h s of t h e i r lives. T h e results w e r e striking; we'll

g e t to t h o s e shortly.

Following these p r e l i m i n a r y studies, Harlow w a n t e d to e x p l o r e t h e ef-

fects o f a t t a c h m e n t a n d c o n t a c t c o m f o r t i n g r e a t e r detail. C o m m o n knowl-

e d g e tells us that w h e n c h i l d r e n a r e afraid they will seek o u t t h e c o m f o r t of

t h e i r m o t h e r s ( o r o t h e r p r i m a r y c a r e g i v e r s ) . T o f i n d o u t how t h e y o u n g m o n -

keys with t h e wire a n d c l o t h m o t h e r s would r e s p o n d in such situations, H a r -

low p l a c e d in t h e i r c a g e s objects t h a t c a u s e d a fearful r e a c t i o n , such as a

wind-up drum-playing toy b e a r ( t o a baby monkey, this bear, which is nearly as

Reading 17 Discovering Love 129

big as t h e m o n k e y itself, was very f r i g h t e n i n g ) . T h e r e s p o n s e s of t h e monkeys

in these situations w e r e o b s e r v e d a n d r e c o r d e d carefully.

A n o t h e r study H a r l o w d e v e l o p e d was called t h e open field test a n d in-

volved y o u n g m o n k e y s p l a c e d in a small, unfamiliar r o o m c o n t a i n i n g various

objects such as w o o d e n blocks, blankets, c o n t a i n e r s with lids, a n d a folded

p i e c e o f paper. U n d e r n o r m a l c o n d i t i o n s , m o n k e y s like t o play with a n d m a -

nipulate these objects. T h e m o n k e y s w h o w e r e raised with b o t h t h e c l o t h a n d

wire m o t h e r s w e r e p l a c e d i n t h e r o o m with e i t h e r t h e c l o t h m o t h e r p r e s e n t ,

n o m o t h e r present, o r t h e wire m o t h e r p r e s e n t . T h e i d e a h e r e was t o e x a m i n e

t h e t e n d e n c y o f t h e y o u n g m o n k e y s t o a d a p t t o a n d e x p l o r e this s t r a n g e situa-

tion with o r without t h e p r e s e n c e o f t h e m o t h e r .

Finally, H a r l o w w a n t e d to find o u t if t h e a t t a c h m e n t s f o r m e d between

the monkeys a n d t h e i r s u r r o g a t e m o t h e r s would persist after p e r i o d s o f sepa-

ration. W h e n t h e m o n k e y s r e a c h e d 6 m o n t h s o f a g e a n d w e r e o n solid food

diets, they were s e p a r a t e d for s h o r t p e r i o d s f r o m t h e s u r r o g a t e m o t h e r a n d

t h e n r e u n i t e d in t h e open-field situation.

R E S U L T S

In the original e x p e r i m e n t , all t h e monkeys h a d access to b o t h t h e cloth m o t h e r

a n d t h e wire m o t h e r . F o r half the monkeys, t h e cloth m o t h e r provided t h e milk,

a n d for t h e o t h e r half t h e wire m o t h e r did so. By now you've probably guessed

that the monkeys p r e f e r r e d t h e cloth m o t h e r (wouldn't you?), b u t what was so

surprising was the intense strength of this p r e f e r e n c e even a m o n g those m o n -

keys who received their milk f r o m the wire m o t h e r . At t h e time of this r e s e a r c h ,

the prevailing view was that fulfilling biological needs such as h u n g e r a n d thirst

was the p r i m a r y motivator of animals' ( a n d h u m a n s ' ) behavior. However, in

Harlow's studies these n e e d s a p p e a r e d to e x e r t a relatively insignificant influ-

e n c e on t h e monkeys' c h o i c e of a m o t h e r . Instead, a f u n d a m e n t a l n e e d for c o n -

tact c o m f o r t was m o s t significant in p r o d u c i n g an a t t a c h m e n t between infant

a n d its mother. Figure 17-1 graphically illustrates this effect.

After t h e first few days of adjustment, all t h e monkeys, r e g a r d l e s s of

which m o t h e r h a d t h e milk, were spending nearly all t h e i r time e a c h day on

t h e c l o t h m o t h e r . E v e n t h o s e m o n k e y s feeding f r o m t h e wire m o t h e r would

only leave t h e c o m f o r t o f t h e c l o t h m o t h e r t o n u r s e briefly a n d t h e n r e t u r n

immediately t o t h e c l o t h - c o v e r e d s u r r o g a t e .

T h e two g r o u p s of m o n k e y s t h a t w e r e raised with e i t h e r a c l o t h or wire

m o t h e r f u r t h e r d e m o n s t r a t e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f c o n t a c t c o m f o r t . A l t h o u g h

both g r o u p s o f these infants a t e t h e s a m e a m o u n t a n d g a i n e d weight a t t h e

s a m e r a t e , t h e infants feeding f r o m t h e wire m o t h e r did n o t digest t h e milk as

well a n d e x p e r i e n c e d f r e q u e n t bouts o f d i a r r h e a . This suggests t h a t t h e lack

of t h e soft m o t h e r was psychologically stressful to these infants.

T h e results o f t h e frightening-object tests p r o v i d e d additional e v i d e n c e

o f t h e y o u n g monkeys' a t t a c h m e n t t o t h e c l o t h m o t h e r . W h e n t h e m o n k e y s

were faced with s o m e t h i n g frightening, they would r u n t o t h e c l o t h m o t h e r

a n d cling to it for c o m f o r t a n d p r o t e c t i o n . As t h e monkeys' a g e i n c r e a s e d , this

130 Chapter V Human Development

FIGURE 17-1 Amount of time spent each day on the cloth and wire mothers.

r e s p o n s e b e c a m e even stronger. Again, it m a d e no difference w h e t h e r a m o n -

key h a d r e c e i v e d its milk f r o m t h e wire or t h e c l o t h m o t h e r ; when afraid, all

s o u g h t t h e security o f t h e soft, c l o t h - c o v e r e d s u r r o g a t e .

You m a y have n o t i c e d in h u m a n s t h a t w h e n c h i l d r e n feel safe a n d s e c u r e

b e c a u s e a p a r e n t i s n e a r , they a r e m o r e c u r i o u s a n d m o r e willing t o e x p l o r e

t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t . Often, they will investigate everything a r o u n d t h e m , p r o -

vided they a r e still able to see t h e p a r e n t . Harlow's "strange-situation" a n d

"open-field" tests w e r e d e s i g n e d to simulate this behavior in t h e monkeys.

W h e n p l a c e d in t h e s t r a n g e r o o m , all t h e m o n k e y s immediately r u s h e d to t h e

c l o t h m o t h e r , c l u t c h e d it, r u b b e d t h e i r bodies against it, a n d m a n i p u l a t e d its

b o d y a n d face. After a while these infants "began to use t h e m o t h e r s u r r o g a t e

as a s o u r c e of security, a base of o p e r a t i o n s . . . . T h e y would e x p l o r e a n d m a -

nipulate a stimulus a n d t h e n r e t u r n t o t h e m o t h e r b e f o r e adventuring again

into t h e s t r a n g e new world" ( p . 6 7 9 ) .

However, w h e n t h e infant monkeys w e r e p l a c e d in t h e s a m e r o o m with-

o u t t h e soft m o t h e r , t h e i r r e a c t i o n s w e r e c o m p l e t e l y different. T h e y would

freeze with fear a n d e n g a g e in e m o t i o n a l behaviors s u c h as crying, c r o u c h i n g ,

a n d t h u m b sucking. S o m e t i m e s they would r u n t o t h e p a r t o f t h e r o o m w h e r e

t h e m o t h e r usually was a n d t h e n r u n c r y i n g f r o m o b j e c t t o object. W h e n the

wire m o t h e r was present, they b e h a v e d exactiy t h e s a m e as if no m o t h e r were

p r e s e n t . This was o n c e again t r u e o f all t h e m o n k e y s , regardless o f t h e nursing

c o n d i t i o n (cloth vs. wire) in which they h a d b e e n raised.

Reading 17 Discovering Love 131

In t h e last p a r t of this study, t h e m o n k e y s w e r e s e p a r a t e d f r o m t h e

m o t h e r for various p e r i o d s o f t i m e after they s t o p p e d nursing a n d w e r e o n

solid-food diets ( a b o u t 5 to 6 m o n t h s of a g e ) . After t h e longest s e p a r a t i o n ( 3 0

days), when t h e m o n k e y s w e r e r e u n i t e d with t h e c l o t h m o t h e r in t h e s a m e

open-field situation, t h e m o n k e y s r u s h e d to t h e m o t h e r , c l i m b e d on it,

c l u t c h e d it tightly, a n d r u b b e d t h e i r h e a d s a n d faces on its body. T h e y t h e n

played with t h e s u r r o g a t e m o t h e r , which i n c l u d e d biting a n d tearing at t h e

c l o t h cover. T h e m a i n difference was t h a t t h e monkeys did n o t leave t h e

m o t h e r to e x p l o r e a n d play with t h e objects in t h e r o o m as they h a d d o n e be-

fore. Apparently, a c c o r d i n g t o Harlow, t h e n e e d for c o n t a c t c o m f o r t was

g r e a t e r t h a n t h e n a t u r a l t e n d e n c y for e x p l o r a t i o n . I t should b e p o i n t e d out,

however, t h a t these r e u n i o n s w e r e brief, a n d m o r e e x p l o r a t i o n may have o c -

c u r r e d i f t h e sessions h a d b e e n e x t e n d e d .

D I S C U S S I O N

As Harlow p o i n t e d out, these studies d e m o n s t r a t e t h e o v e r w h e l m i n g i m p o r -

t a n c e o f c o n t a c t c o m f o r t i n t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e close a t t a c h m e n t between

infant monkeys a n d t h e i r m o t h e r s . This f a c t o r in b o n d i n g a p p e a r s to be c o n -

siderably m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n t h e m o t h e r ' s ability to provide life-sustaining

milk to t h e infant.

O n e o f the m a n y r e a s o n s this r e s e a r c h c h a n g e d psychology i s t h a t t h e

findings went against t h e grain of t h e p o p u l a r beliefs of t h e behaviorists at

t h a t t i m e , w h o focused o n t h e r e i n f o r c e m e n t qualities o f feeding a s t h e dri-

ving f o r c e b e h i n d t h e i n f a n t - m o t h e r b o n d . However, as H a r l o w stated, "the

p r i m a r y function of nursing as an affectional variable is that of e n s u r i n g fre-

q u e n t a n d i n t i m a t e body c o n t a c t o f t h e infant with t h e m o t h e r . Certainly, m a n

c a n n o t live by milk alone" ( p . 6 7 7 ) .

Harlow ( a n d m a n y o t h e r s ) were c o n v i n c e d t h a t his results c o u l d be ap-

plied to h u m a n s , an issue to be discussed shordy. In fact, he offered his find-

ings' practical applications to h u m a n s . He c o n t e n d e d that as s o c i o e c o n o m i c

d e m a n d s on t h e family i n c r e a s e d , w o m e n would begin to e n t e r t h e workplace

with increasing frequency. This was of c o n c e r n to m a n y at t h e time of Harlow's

r e s e a r c h b e c a u s e it was widely believed that t h e m o t h e r ' s p r e s e n c e a n d nursing

were necessary for a t t a c h m e n t a n d p r o p e r child development. H e went o n t o

state that, because the key to successful p a r e n t i n g is c o n t a c t c o m f o r t a n d n o t

the " m a m m a r y capabilities" of w o m e n , a m a n is c a p a b l e of participating

equally in t h e r e a r i n g of infants. This view may be generally a c c e p t e d today, but

when Harlow wrote this article in 1 9 5 8 , it was revolutionary.

C R I T I C I S M S A N D S I G N I F I C A N C E O F T H E F I N D I N G S

Harlow's claims notwithstanding, do y o u think it is a p p r o p r i a t e to view hu-

m a n s as having t h e s a m e a t t a c h m e n t ( o r "love") processes as monkeys? S o m e

r e s e a r c h supports t h e view t h a t t h e a t t a c h m e n t o f h u m a n babies t o t h e i r c a r e -

givers d o e s i n d e e d go well b e y o n d simply fulfilling biological n e e d s . Studies

132 Chapter V Human Development

have shown t h a t g r e a t e r skin-to-skin c o n t a c t between a m o t h e r a n d h e r very

y o u n g infant e n h a n c e s a t t a c h m e n t (e.g., Klaus & Kennell, 1 9 7 6 ) . However,

t h e a t t a c h m e n t p r o c e s s develops m o r e slowly in h u m a n s : o v e r t h e first 6

m o n t h s c o m p a r e d with t h e first few days for monkeys. In addition, only ap-

p r o x i m a t e l y 7 0 % o f c h i l d r e n a p p e a r t o b e securely a t t a c h e d t o a n adult c a r e -

giver a t 1 y e a r o f a g e (Sroufe, 1 9 8 5 ) .

Many p e o p l e , past a n d present, would criticize Harlow's work b e c a u s e of

t h e ethics o f p e r f o r m i n g such e x p e r i m e n t s o n infant monkeys. T h e question

raised is this: Do we as h u m a n s have t h e right to subject monkeys ( o r any ani-

m a l ) to potentially h a r m f u l situations for t h e sake of r e s e a r c h ? In t h e case of

Harlow's r e s e a r c h , rational a r g u m e n t s may be found on both sides of this

issue. O n e of t h e ways s c i e n c e j u d g e s t h e ethics of r e s e a r c h is by e x a m i n i n g

t h e potential benefits to p e o p l e a n d society. W h e t h e r you feel that this study

was ethical or n o t , t h e findings have affected h u m a n s in several positive ways.

S o m e o f these r e l a t e t o institutionalized c h i l d r e n , a d o p t i o n , a n d child abuse.

Unfortunately, m a n y children a r e f o r c e d to spend portions of their lives in

institutional settings, either b e c a u s e their parents a r e unable to keep a n d c a r e

for t h e m ( o r p h a n a g e s ) or because of various illnesses a n d o t h e r physical diffi-

culties (hospital settings). Harlow's r e s e a r c h has influenced the kind of c a r e we

try to provide for these children. Virtually all child development professionals

a c c e p t that basic biological c a r e in institutional settings is inadequate a n d that

infants n e e d physical c o n t a c t with o t h e r h u m a n s . Institutionalized children

n e e d to be t o u c h e d a n d held by staff m e m b e r s , nurses, a n d volunteers as m u c h

as possible. Also, when n o t p r e c l u d e d by medical conditions, these children a r e

often placed in situations w h e r e they c a n see a n d t o u c h e a c h other, thereby

gaining additional c o n t a c t comfort. Although such attempts at filling attach-

m e n t n e e d s will never r e p l a c e real loving parental c a r e , they a r e clearly a vast

i m p r o v e m e n t over simple custodial supervision.

In addition, Harlow's work has offered e n c o u r a g e m e n t a n d optimism

that n o n m a t e r n a l caregivers a r e perfectly able to be effective p a r e n t s . B e c a u s e

it a p p e a r e d t h a t nursing was s e c o n d a r y to c o n t a c t c o m f o r t in t h e develop-

m e n t a n d a d j u s t m e n t o f infants, t h e a c t u a l m o t h e r o f a child was n o l o n g e r

seen as t h e only p e r s o n who c o u l d provide c a r e . Now m a n y fathers feel m o r e

c o m f o r t a b l e assuming l a r g e r roles in t h e p a r e n t i n g process. B u t b e y o n d this,

o t h e r n o n p a r e n t a l caregivers, such a s babysitters o r d a y c a r e - c e n t e r workers,

w h e n necessary, c a n b e a c c e p t a b l e options. Moreover, these discoveries

greatiy e n h a n c e d views a b o u t a d o p t i o n b e c a u s e society b e g a n to r e c o g n i z e

t h a t an adoptive p a r e n t c o u l d offer a child just as m u c h c o n t a c t c o m f o r t as a

biological p a r e n t .

Harlow's early studies s h e d light on t h e terrible p r o b l e m of child abuse.

O n e surprising a s p e c t of s u c h abusive relationships is that t h e a b u s e d child

seems to love, a n d to be firmly a t t a c h e d , to t h e abusive p a r e n t in nearly all

cases. A c c o r d i n g to a strict behaviorist i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , this is difficult to un-

d e r s t a n d b e c a u s e t h e abuse should b e p e r c e i v e d a s p u n i s h m e n t a n d t h e child

should withdraw f r o m any a t t a c h m e n t . B u t if t h e a t t a c h m e n t itself is o u r

Reading 17 Discovering Love 133

strongest basic n e e d , as H a r l o w suggested, t h e n this would far outweigh t h e ef-

fects of t h e abuse. H a r l o w actually tested this in l a t e r studies. He designed sur-

r o g a t e m o t h e r m o n k e y s t h a t w e r e able t o r e j e c t t h e i r infants. S o m e e m i t t e d

strong j e t s o f air, while o t h e r s h a d blunt spikes t h a t would p o p o u t a n d f o r c e

t h e baby m o n k e y s away. T h e way t h e monkeys would r e s p o n d to this treat-

m e n t would be to m o v e a small distance away until t h e r e j e c t i o n e n d e d . T h e y

would t h e n r e t u r n a n d cling to t h e m o t h e r as tighdy as ever ( R o s e n b l u m &

Harlow, 1 9 6 3 ) .

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

Harlow's r e s e a r c h c o n t i n u e s to be cited frequendy in studies a b o u t t o u c h ,

bonding, a t t a c h m e n t , a n d t h e effects o f h u m a n c o n t a c t o n h u m a n s ' e m o t i o n a l

a n d physical health. O n e such study e x a m i n e d t h e c o n n e c t i o n between social

isolation ( t h e lack of opportunities for close, meaningful, social c o n t a c t with

o t h e r s ) a n d physical health a m o n g adults w h o lived lonely lives ( C a c i o p p o &

Hawkley, 2 0 0 3 ) . Findings indicated that adults lacking in social c o n t a c t e x p e r i -

e n c e d c o m m o n , everyday life events as m o r e stressful, were at g r e a t e r risk of

high blood pressure, h e a l e d f r o m injuries m o r e slowly, a n d slept m o r e poorly

than p e o p l e whose lives c o n t a i n e d healthy social c o n n e c t i o n s .

A n o t h e r study citing Harlow's work d e m o n s t r a t e d how skin-to-skin c o n -

t a c t (cleverly r e f e r r e d to as kangaroo care) is critically i m p o r t a n t in t h e survival

a n d d e v e l o p m e n t of premature infants a n d in establishing t h e i n f a n t - m o t h e r

b o n d following p r e m a t u r e births ( F e l d m a n & E i d e l m a n , 1 9 9 8 ) . T h i s is an im-

p o r t a n t finding, in that hospitals c a r i n g for high-risk p r e m a t u r e infants m u s t

work to b a l a n c e t h e babies' n e e d s for physical c o n t a c t a n d t o u c h , with o t h e r ,

equally c o m p e l l i n g c o n c e r n s o v e r potentially life-threatening infections t h a t a

p r e m a t u r e baby's u n d e v e l o p e d i m m u n e system m i g h t be u n a b l e to fight.

Harlow's ideas have also b e e n applied to p s y c h o t h e r a p e u t i c settings. As

humanistic a n d holistic a p p r o a c h e s t o c o u n s e l i n g have d e v e l o p e d o v e r t h e

past 4 0 years, t h e healing qualities o f t o u c h have played a n increasingly c e n -

tral role. As o n e psychotherapist explains:

I have found that when touch is focused and intentioned, particularly in touch therapies such as acupressure and therapeutic touch, it becomes an important aspect in the therapeutic interaction. It deepens awareness and supports change. Rather than creating confusion, touch therapies when used appropri- ately enhance the psychotherapeutic interaction instead of detracting from it. The key word here is appropriate. Touch is a very powerful tool and should not be used lightly. (LaTorre, 2000, p. 105)

C O N C L U S I O N

It would be a mistake to a s s u m e that H a r l o w h a d a m o n o p o l y on t h e defini-

tion of "love." It is unmistakable, however, t h a t his discoveries c h a n g e d t h e

way we view t h e c o n n e c t i o n s between infant a n d m o t h e r . P e r h a p s , if this r e -

s e a r c h has p e r m e a t e d , even a little, i n t o society, s o m e g o o d has c o m e f r o m it.

134 Chapter V Human Development

Reading 18: OUT OF SIGHT, BUT /VOT OUT OF MIND Piaget, J. (1954). The development of object concept. In J. Piaget, The construction

of reality in the child (pp. 3-96). New York: Basic Books.

H o w did you develop f r o m an infant, with a few e l e m e n t a r y thinking skills, to

t h e adult you a r e now, with t h e ability to r e a s o n a n d analyze t h e world in m a n y

c o m p l e x ways involving language, symbols, a n d logic? Y o u r first r e a c t i o n to this

question may very likely be to say, "Well, I l e a r n e d how to think f r o m my e x p e -

r i e n c e s a n d f r o m t h e t e a c h i n g I received from adults t h r o u g h o u t my life."

A l t h o u g h this e x p l a n a t i o n seems intuitively c o r r e c t to m o s t p e o p l e ,

m a n y d e v e l o p m e n t a l psychologists believe that m u c h m o r e is involved in a c -

quiring intellectual abilities t h a n simple learning. T h e prevailing view a b o u t

intellectual d e v e l o p m e n t is that it is a p r o c e s s of m a t u r a t i o n , m u c h like physi-

cal d e v e l o p m e n t , that o c c u r s in a p r e d i c t a b l e fashion f r o m birth t h r o u g h

a d u l t h o o d .

Do you look at an infant a n d see a p e r s o n who, with e n o u g h learning, is

c a p a b l e o f adult physical behaviors? O f c o u r s e not. Instead, you know that t h e

child's behavior will b e c o m e increasingly c o m p l e x o v e r time t h r o u g h a

p r o c e s s of physical m a t u r a t i o n . You know that until t h e child achieves a cer-

tain level of development, all the l e a r n i n g in t h e world c a n n o t p r o d u c e c e r t a i n

behaviors. F o r e x a m p l e , c o n s i d e r t h e behavior of walking. You probably think

of walking as a l e a r n e d behavior. B u t i m a g i n e trying to t e a c h a 6-month-old to

walk. You c o u l d p l a c e t h e infant on an Olympic-level s c h e d u l e of 8 h o u r s of

p r a c t i c e every day, but t h e child will n o t l e a r n to walk. Why? B e c a u s e t h e child

has n o t yet r e a c h e d t h e physical maturity to p e r f o r m the behaviors n e e d e d to

walk.

Intellectual, or cognitive, d e v e l o p m e n t o c c u r s in m u c h t h e same way.

C h i l d r e n simply c a n n o t d e m o n s t r a t e c e r t a i n thinking a n d r e a s o n i n g abilities

until they r e a c h a n a p p r o p r i a t e stage o f cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t , n o m a t t e r

O n e small e x a m p l e indicating t h a t this has h a p p e n e d is a story H a r l o w told in

his own words a b o u t a w o m a n who, after h e a r i n g Harlow p r e s e n t his r e s e a r c h ,

c a m e up to h i m a n d said, "Now I know what's w r o n g with m e ! I'm just a wire

m o t h e r " ( p . 677).

Cacioppo, J . , & Hawkley, L. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Social isolation and health with an emphasis on underlying mechanisms. Perspectives in Biology and Mediane, 46, S39-S52.

Feldman, R., & Eidelman, A. ( 1 9 9 8 ) . Intervention programs for premature infants: How and do they affect development? Clinics in Perinatology, 2 5 ( 3 ) , 6 1 3 - 6 2 9 .

Klaus, M. H., & Kennell, J. H. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . Maternal infant bonding. St. Louis, MO: Mosby. LaTorre M. ( 2 0 0 0 ) . Integrative perspectives. Touch and psychotherapy. Perspectives in Psychiatric

Care 36, 1 0 5 - 1 0 6 . Rosenblum, L. A., & Harlow, H. ( 1 9 6 3 ) . Approach-avoidance conflict in the mother surrogate sit-

uation. Psychological Reports, 12, 8 3 - 8 5 . Sroufe, A. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Attachment classification from the perspective of the infant-caregiver relation-

ships and infant temperament. Child Development, 56, 1-14.

Reading 18 Out of Sight, But Not Out of Mind 135

how m u c h l e a r n i n g they m a y have e x p e r i e n c e d . Psychology owes its u n d e r -

standing o f this c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t i n l a r g e p a r t t o

t h e work o f Swiss psychologist J e a n Piaget ( 1 8 9 6 - 1 9 8 0 ) .

Piaget is o n e of t h e m o s t influential figures in t h e history of psychology.

His work n o t only revolutionized d e v e l o p m e n t a l psychology but also f o r m e d

t h e foundation for m o s t subsequent investigations in the a r e a of t h e f o r m a t i o n

of t h e intellect. Piaget was originally trained as a biologist a n d studied t h e in-

b o r n ability of animals to a d a p t to new e n v i r o n m e n t s . While Piaget was study-

ing at the S o r b o n n e in Paris, he a c c e p t e d a j o b ( t o e a r n e x t r a m o n e y ) at t h e

Alfred B i n e t L a b o r a t o r y , w h e r e t h e first h u m a n intelligence tests w e r e being

developed. He was hired to standardize a F r e n c h version of a r e a s o n i n g test

that originally h a d b e e n developed in English. It was d u r i n g his e m p l o y m e n t in

Paris that Piaget began to f o r m u l a t e his theories a b o u t cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

T h e work a t t h e B i n e t L a b o r a t o r y was tedious a n d n o t v e r y interesting t o

Piaget a t f i r s t . T h e n h e b e g a n t o d e t e c t s o m e interesting p a t t e r n s i n t h e an-

swers given by c h i l d r e n at various ages to t h e questions on t h e test. C h i l d r e n at

similar ages a p p e a r e d to be making t h e s a m e mistakes. T h a t is, they a p p e a r e d

to be using similar r e a s o n i n g strategies to r e a c h similar answers. W h a t fasci-

n a t e d Piaget was n o t t h e c o r r e c t answers but t h e thinking processes t h a t p r o -

d u c e d the similar wrong answers. B a s e d on his observations, he t h e o r i z e d t h a t

o l d e r c h i l d r e n h a d n o t j u s t l e a r n e d m o r e t h a n t h e y o u n g e r o n e s but w e r e

thinking differently a b o u t t h e p r o b l e m s . This led h i m to question t h e prevailing

definition o f intelligence a t t h e time ( t h e I Q s c o r e ) , i n favor o f a m o d e l t h a t

involved a m o r e c o m p l e t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e cognitive strategies used in

c o m m o n by c h i l d r e n at various ages (Ginzburg & O p p e r , 1 9 7 9 ) .

Piaget devoted t h e n e x t 5 0 years o f his life a n d c a r e e r t o studying intel-

lectual d e v e l o p m e n t in c h i l d r e n . His work led to his f a m o u s t h e o r y of c o g n i -

tive d e v e l o p m e n t , which for d e c a d e s was a virtually u n d i s p u t e d e x p l a n a t i o n of

how h u m a n s a c q u i r e t h e i r c o m p l e x thinking skills. His t h e o r y holds that dur-

ing c h i l d h o o d , h u m a n s p r o g r e s s t h r o u g h four stages o f cognitive develop-

m e n t that always o c c u r i n t h e s a m e s e q u e n c e a n d a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e s a m e

ages. T h e s e a r e s u m m a r i z e d in Table 1 8 - 1 .

P e r h a p s as i m p o r t a n t as his t h e o r y w e r e t h e t e c h n i q u e s P i a g e t u s e d to

study thinking abilities in c h i l d r e n . At t h e B i n e t L a b o r a t o r y , he realized t h a t if

he was to e x p l o r e his new c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n of intelligence, he would also

n e e d t o develop t h e m e t h o d s t o d o so. I n s t e a d o f t h e usual, rigid, s t a n d a r d -

ized intelligence tests, he p r o p o s e d an interview t e c h n i q u e t h a t allowed t h e

child's answers to influence t h e d i r e c t i o n of t h e questioning. In this way, he

would be able to e x p l o r e t h e processes underlying t h e child's r e a s o n i n g .

O n e o f t h e m o s t r e m a r k a b l e aspects o f Piaget's r e s e a r c h i s t h a t i n r e a c h -

ing m a n y of his conclusions, he studied his own children: L u c i e n n e , J a c q u e -

line, a n d L a u r e n t . By today's scientific s t a n d a r d s , this m e t h o d would be highly

136 Chapter V Human Development

STAGE AGE RANGE MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS

Sensori-motor 0-2 years • All knowledge is acquired through senses and move- ment (such as looking and grasping).

• Thinking is at the same speed as physical movement. • Object permanence develops.

Preoperational 2-7 years • Thinking separates from movement and increases greatly in speed.

• Ability to think in symbols develops. • Nonlogical, "magical" thinking occurs. • All objects have thoughts and feelings (animism). • Egocentric thinking (unable to see world from others'

points of view) develops.

Concrete operations 7-11 years • Logical thinking develops, including classifying objects and mathematical principles, but only as they apply to real, concrete objects.

• Understanding of conservation of liquid, area, and volume develops.

• Ability develops to infer what others may be feeling or thinking.

Formal operations 11 and up • Logical thinking extends to hypothetical and abstract concepts.

• Ability forms to reason using metaphors and analogies.

• Ability forms to explore values, beliefs, philosophies. • Ability forms to think about past and future. • Not everyone uses formal operations to the same

degree, and some not at all.

suspect b e c a u s e of t h e r a t h e r likely possibility of bias a n d lack of objectivity.

However, as rules always have e x c e p t i o n s , Piaget's findings f r o m his c h i l d r e n

c o u l d be applied to all c h i l d r e n , universally.

A single c h a p t e r in this b o o k is far t o o little s p a c e to e x p l o r e m o r e than

a small fraction of Piaget's work. T h e r e f o r e , we will focus on his discovery of

o n e key intellectual ability, object permanence. This facility provides an e x c e l l e n t

e x a m p l e o f o n e o f Piaget's m o s t i m p o r t a n t findings, a s well a s a m p l e o p p o r t u -

nity t o e x p e r i e n c e his m e t h o d s o f r e s e a r c h .

O b j e c t p e r m a n e n c e refers to y o u r ability to know t h a t an o b j e c t exists

even w h e n it is h i d d e n f r o m y o u r senses. If s o m e o n e walks o v e r to you now

a n d takes this b o o k o u t o f y o u r h a n d s a n d r u n s into t h e n e x t r o o m , d o you

think t h a t t h e b o o k o r t h e b o o k s n a t c h e r has c e a s e d t o exist? O f c o u r s e not.

You have a concept of t h e b o o k a n d of t h e p e r s o n in y o u r m i n d , even t h o u g h

y o u c a n n o t see, h e a r , o r t o u c h t h e m . However, a c c o r d i n g t o Piaget, this was

n o t always t r u e for you. He d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t y o u r cognitive ability to c o n -

ceive o f objects a s p e r m a n e n t a n d u n c h a n g i n g was s o m e t h i n g you, a n d every-

o n e else, d e v e l o p e d d u r i n g y o u r first 2 years of life. T h e r e a s o n this ability is

TABLE 18-1 Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development

Reading 18 Out of Sight, But Not Out of Mind 137

i m p o r t a n t is that p r o b l e m solving a n d i n t e r n a l thinking a r e impossible with-

o u t it. T h e r e f o r e , b e f o r e a child c a n leave t h e s e n s o r i - m o t o r stage (0 to

2 years; see Table 1 8 - 1 ) a n d e n t e r t h e p r e o p e r a t i o n a l p e r i o d ( 2 t o 7 y e a r s ) , ob-

j e c t p e r m a n e n c e must develop.

M E T H O D A N D R E S U L T S

Piaget studied t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of o b j e c t p e r m a n e n c e using unstructured eval-

uation methods: b e c a u s e infants c a n n o t e x a c t l y be "interviewed," these t e c h -

niques often t o o k t h e f o r m of g a m e s he would play with his c h i l d r e n .

T h r o u g h observing problem-solving ability a n d t h e e r r o r s t h e infants m a d e

playing t h e g a m e s , Piaget identified six substages of d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t o c c u r

d u r i n g t h e sensori-motor p e r i o d a n d t h a t a r e involved i n t h e f o r m a t i o n o f ob-

j e c t p e r m a n e n c e . F o r you t o e x p e r i e n c e t h e flavor o f his r e s e a r c h , these six

stages a r e s u m m a r i z e d h e r e with e x a m p l e s of Piaget's i n t e r a c t i o n s with his

c h i l d r e n q u o t e d f r o m his actual o b s e r v a t i o n a l j o u r n a l s :

• STAGE 1 (Birth to 1 month). This stage is c o n c e r n e d primarily with r e -

flexes relating t o feeding a n d t o u c h i n g . N o e v i d e n c e o f o b j e c t p e r m a -

n e n c e is seen d u r i n g this first m o n t h of life.

• STAGE 2 (1 to 4 months). During stage 2, a l t h o u g h no sign of an o b j e c t

c o n c e p t is found, Piaget i n t e r p r e t s s o m e behaviors as p r e p a r i n g t h e in-

fant for this ability. T h e child begins to r e p e a t , on p u r p o s e , c e r t a i n be-

haviors t h a t c e n t e r on t h e infant's own body. F o r e x a m p l e , if an infant's

h a n d accidentally c o m e s in c o n t a c t with its foot, it m i g h t r e p r o d u c e t h e

s a m e m o v e m e n t s o v e r a n d over again t o c a u s e t h e event t o b e r e p e a t e d .

Piaget called these primary circular reactions. Also, at this stage, infants a r e

able to follow moving objects with t h e i r eyes. If an o b j e c t leaves t h e

child's visual field a n d fails to r e a p p e a r , t h e child will t u r n its a t t e n t i o n

to o t h e r visible objects a n d show no signs of looking for t h e "vanished"

object. However, if t h e o b j e c t r e p e a t e d l y r e a p p e a r s in t h e s a m e l o c a t i o n ,

t h e infant will look l o n g e r at that point. Piaget called this b e h a v i o r

passive expectation. T h e following i n t e r a c t i o n between Piaget a n d his son,

L a u r e n t , illustrates this:

Observation 2. Laurent at 0;2 [0 years, 2 months]. I look at him through the hood of his bassinet and from time to time I appear at a more or less con- stant point; Laurent then watches that point when I am out of his sight and ob- viously expects me to reappear, (p. 9)

The child limits himself to looking at the place where the object vanished: Thus he merely preserves the attitude of the earlier perception and if nothing reappears, he soon gives up. If he had the object c o n c e p t . . . he would actively search to find out where the thing could have been put. . . . But this is precisely what he does not know how to do, for the vanished object is not yet a permanent object which has been moved; it is a mere image which reenters the void as soon as it vanishes, and emerges from it for no objective reason, (p. 11)

• STAGE 3 (4 to 10 months). During this stage children begin to purposefully

a n d repeatedly m a n i p u l a t e objects they e n c o u n t e r in their e n v i r o n m e n t

138 Chapter V Human Development

(called secondary circular reactions). T h e child begins to r e a c h for a n d

grasp things, to shake t h e m , bring t h e m closer to look at t h e m or place

t h e m in t h e m o u t h , a n d to a c q u i r e t h e ability of rapid eye m o v e m e n t s to

follow quickly moving or falling objects. L a t e in this stage, t h e first signs

o f object p e r m a n e n c e appear. F o r e x a m p l e , children begin t o search for

objects that a r e o b s c u r e d f r o m view if a small p a r t of the object is visible.

Observation 23. At 0;9 I offer Lucienne a celluloid goose which she has never seen before; she grasps it at once and examines it all over. I place the goose beside her and cover it before her eyes, sometimes completely, some- times revealing the head. Two very distinct reactions. . . . When the goose disappears completely, Lucienne immediately stops searching even when she is on the point of grasping it. . . . When the beak protrudes, not only does she grasp the visible part and draw the animal to her, but . . . she sometimes raises the coverlet beforehand in order to grasp the whole thing! . . . Never, even after having raised the coverlet several times on see- ing the beak appear, has Lucienne tried to raise it when the goose was com- pletely hidden! Here . . . is proof of the fact that the reconstruction of a totality is much easier than the search for an invisible object, (pp. 2 9 - 3 0 )

Still, however, P i a g e t m a i n t a i n s t h a t t h e o b j e c t c o n c e p t is n o t fully

f o r m e d . To t h e child at this stage, t h e o b j e c t d o e s n o t have an

independent e x i s t e n c e b u t is tied to t h e child's own a c t i o n s a n d sensory

p e r c e p t i o n s . In o t h e r words, "It would be impossible to say t h a t t h e half-

h i d d e n objective is c o n c e i v e d as being m a s k e d by a s c r e e n ; it is simply

p e r c e i v e d a s being i n t h e p r o c e s s o f disappearing" ( p . 3 5 ) .

• STAGE 4 (10 to 12 months). In t h e later weeks of stage 3 a n d early in stage

4, c h i l d r e n have a c q u i r e d t h e ability to know that objects c o n t i n u e to

exist even w h e n t h e objects a r e no l o n g e r visible. A child will s e a r c h a c -

t i v e l y a n d creatively for a n o b j e c t that h a s b e e n c o m p l e t e l y h i d d e n from

view. A l t h o u g h on t h e surface this m a y s e e m to indicate a fully devel-

o p e d o b j e c t c o n c e p t , Piaget found that this cognitive skill is still i n c o m -

plete b e c a u s e t h e child lacks t h e ability to u n d e r s t a n d visible displacements.

To u n d e r s t a n d what Piaget m e a n t by this, c o n s i d e r t h e following e x a m -

ple (you c a n try this yourself t h e n e x t time you a r e a baby a r o u n d 1 year

o l d ) . If you sit with an 1 1 - m o n t h - o l d a n d h i d e a toy completely u n d e r a

towel (call this p l a c e A ) , t h e child will s e a r c h for a n d find it. However, if

y o u t h e n h i d e t h e toy, as t h e child watches, u n d e r a blanket ( p l a c e B ) ,

t h e child will probably go b a c k to s e a r c h i n g for it w h e r e it was previously

f o u n d , i n p l a c e A . F u r t h e r m o r e , y o u c a n r e p e a t this p r o c e s s over a n d

o v e r a n d t h e child will c o n t i n u e to m a k e t h e s a m e e r r o r , which Piaget

called t h e A-not-B effect.

Observation 40. At 0;10 Jacqueline is seated on a mattress . . . I take her parrot from her hands and hide it twice in succession under the mattress, on her left, in A. Both times Jacqueline looks for the object immediately and grabs it. Then I take it from her hands and move it very slowly before her eyes to the corresponding place on her right, under the mattress, in B. Jacqueline watches the movement very attentively, but at the moment

Reading 18 Out of Sight, But Not Out of Mind 139

when the parrot disappears in B she turns to her left and looks where it was before, in A. (p. 5 1 )

Piaget's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of this e r r o r in stage 4 was n o t that children

a r e a b s e n t m i n d e d b u t that t h e o b j e c t c o n c e p t is n o t t h e s a m e for t h e m as

it is for you or m e . To 10-month-old J a c q u e l i n e , h e r p a r r o t is n o t a per-

m a n e n t , s e p a r a t e thing that exists i n d e p e n d e n d y of h e r actions. W h e n it

was hidden a n d t h e n successfully found in A, it b e c a m e a "parrot-in-A," a

thing t h a t was defined n o t only by its "parrotness" b u t also by its hiding

place. In o t h e r words, t h e p a r r o t is j u s t a p i e c e of t h e overall p i c t u r e in

t h e child's m i n d a n d n o t a s e p a r a t e object.

• STAGE 5 (12 to 18 months). B e g i n n i n g a r o u n d t h e e n d of t h e first y e a r of

life, t h e child gains t h e ability to follow visible sequential d i s p l a c e m e n t s

a n d s e a r c h e s for an o b j e c t w h e r e it was last visibly h i d d e n . W h e n this

h a p p e n s , Piaget c l a i m e d t h a t t h e child h a d e n t e r e d stage 5 of t h e sen-

s o r i - m o t o r p e r i o d .

Observation 54. Laurent, at 0;11, is seated between two cushions, A and B. I hide the watch alternately under each; Laurent constantly searches for the object where it has just disappeared, that is sometimes in A, sometimes in B, without remaining attached to a privileged position as during the preceding stage, (p. 6 7 )

However, Piaget points o u t t h a t t r u e o b j e c t p e r m a n e n c e r e m a i n s

i n c o m p l e t e b e c a u s e t h e child is u n a b l e to u n d e r s t a n d what he called

invisible displacements. I m a g i n e t h e following e x a m p l e : You watch s o m e -

o n e p l a c e a c o i n in a small b o x a n d t h e n , with his or h e r back to you, t h e

p e r s o n walks over to t h e d r e s s e r a n d o p e n s a drawer. W h e n t h e p e r s o n

r e t u r n s you discover that t h e b o x is empty. This is an invisible displace-

m e n t o f t h e object. Naturally, you would g o t o t h e dresser a n d look i n

t h e drawer. Piaget a n d J a c q u e l i n e d e m o n s t r a t e d this as follows.

Observation 55. At 1;6 Jacqueline is sitting on a green rug and playing with a potato, which interests her very much (it is a new object for h e r ) . She . . . amuses herself by putting it into an empty box and taking it out again. I then take the potato and put it in the box while Jacqueline watches. Then I place the box under the rug and turn it upside down, thus leaving the object hidden by the rug without letting the child see my ma- neuver, and I bring out the empty box. I say to Jacqueline, who has not stopped looking at the rug and who realized that I was doing something under it: "Give Papa the potato." She searches for the object in the box, looks at me, again looks at the box minutely, looks at the rug, etc., but it does not occur to her to raise the rug in order to find the potato under- neath. During the five subsequent attempts the reaction is uniformly neg- ative, (p. 68)

• STAGE 6 (18 to 24 months). As t h e child a p p r o a c h e s t h e e n d of t h e sen-

s o r i - m o t o r p e r i o d ( r e f e r b a c k t o T a b l e 1 8 - 1 ) , t h e c o n c e p t o f t h e p e r m a -

n e n t o b j e c t b e c o m e s fully realized. E n t r y into this stage is d e t e r m i n e d by

140 Chapter V Human Development

t h e child's ability to r e p r e s e n t mentally objects that u n d e r g o invisible

d i s p l a c e m e n t s .

Observation 66. At 1;7 Jacqueline reveals herself to be . . . capable of conceiv- ing of the object under a series of superimposed or encasing screens I put the pencil in the box, put a piece of paper around it, wrap this in a handker- chief, then cover the whole thing with the beret and the coverlet. Jacqueline removes these last two screens, then unfolds the handkerchief. She does not find the box right away, but continues looking for it, evidently convinced of its presence; she then perceives the paper, recognizes it immediately, unfolds it, opens the box, and grasps the pencil, (p. 81)

Piaget c o n s i d e r e d t h e cognitive skill of object p e r m a n e n c e to be the be-

ginning of t r u e thought: the ability to use insight a n d m e n t a l symbolism

to solve p r o b l e m s . This, then, p r e p a r e s the child to move into t h e n e x t

full stage of cognitive development: t h e preoperational period, during which

t h o u g h t separates f r o m action, allowing t h e speed o f m e n t a l o p e r a t i o n s

to i n c r e a s e gready. In o t h e r words, object p e r m a n e n c e is t h e foundation

for all subsequent advances in intellectual ability. As Piaget stated:

The conservation of the object is, among other things, a function of its local- ization; that is, the child simultaneously learns that the object does not cease to exist when it disappears and he learns where it does go. This fact shows from the outset that the formation of the schema of the permanent object is closely related to the whole spatio-temporal and causal organization of the practical universe. (Piaget & Inhelder, 1969)

D I S C U S S I O N

T h i s m e t h o d o f e x e r c i s e s a n d o b s e r v a t i o n o f b e h a v i o r f o r m e d t h e basis o f

P i a g e t ' s work t h r o u g h o u t his f o r m u l a t i o n o f all f o u r stages o f cognitive de-

v e l o p m e n t . P i a g e t c o n t e n d e d t h a t all of his stages a p p l i e d universally to all

c h i l d r e n , r e g a r d l e s s o f c u l t u r a l o r family b a c k g r o u n d . I n a d d i t i o n , h e

stressed several i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s r e l a t i n g t o t h e stages o f d e v e l o p m e n t o f

t h e o b j e c t c o n c e p t d u r i n g t h e s e n s o r i - m o t o r p e r i o d (see G i n z b u r g & O p p e r ,

1 9 7 9 , for a n e l a b o r a t i o n o f t h e s e p o i n t s ) .

1. T h e ages associated with e a c h stage a r e a p p r o x i m a t e . B e c a u s e Piaget's

early work only involved t h r e e c h i l d r e n , it was difficult for him to p r e d i c t

a g e r a n g e s with a g r e a t deal o f c o n f i d e n c e . F o r e x a m p l e , c e r t a i n abilities

he o b s e r v e d in J a c q u e l i n e at a g e 1;7 were p r e s e n t in L u c i e n n e at 1;3.

2. P i a g e t m a i n t a i n e d , however, t h a t t h e s e q u e n c e of t h e stages was invari-

a n t . All c h i l d r e n must pass t h r o u g h e a c h stage b e f o r e going on to t h e

n e x t , a n d n o stage c a n ever b e skipped.

3 . C h a n g e s f r o m o n e stage t o t h e n e x t o c c u r gradually over time s o that

t h e e r r o r s being m a d e at o n e stage slowly begin to d e c r e a s e as new intel-

lectual abilities m a t u r e . Piaget believed t h a t it is quite c o m m o n a n d n o r -

m a l for c h i l d r e n to be between stages a n d exhibiting abilities f r o m

e a r l i e r a n d later stages a t t h e s a m e t i m e .

Reading 18 Out of Sight, But Not Out of Mind 141

4. As a child m o v e s i n t o t h e n e x t h i g h e r stage, t h e behaviors associated

with t h e lower stages do n o t necessarily d i s a p p e a r completely. It would

n o t be unusual for a child in stage 6 to apply intellectual strategies used

in stage 5. T h e n w h e n these prove unsuccessful, t h e child will invoke

new m e t h o d s for solving t h e p r o b l e m typical of stage 6 r e a s o n i n g .

C R I T I C I S M S A N D R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

A l t h o u g h Piaget's c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n o f cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t d o m i n a t e d t h e

field of d e v e l o p m e n t a l psychology for several d e c a d e s , his view h a s certainly

n o t b e e n without critics. S o m e o f t h e m have q u e s t i o n e d Piaget's basic n o t i o n

that cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t h a p p e n s in discrete stages. Many l e a r n i n g t h e o -

rists have d i s a g r e e d with Piaget on this issue a n d c o n t e n d that intellectual d e -

v e l o p m e n t is c o n t i n u o u s , without any p a r t i c u l a r s e q u e n c e built i n t o t h e

process. T h e y believe that cognitive abilities, like all o t h e r behaviors, a r e a r e -

sult of m o d e l i n g a n d a p e r s o n ' s l e a r n i n g a n d c o n d i t i o n i n g history.

O t h e r critics o f Piaget's ideas have c l a i m e d t h a t t h e a g e r a n g e s a t which

h e asserted specific abilities a p p e a r a r e i n c o r r e c t , a n d s o m e even a r g u e t h a t

c e r t a i n cognitive skills may already be p r e s e n t at birth. O b j e c t p e r m a n e n c e is

o n e of those abilities that has b e e n drawn into question. In a series of inge-

nious studies using r e s e a r c h t e c h n i q u e s known as preference looking (see R e a d -

ing 5 on Fantz's discovery of this r e s e a r c h m e t h o d o l o g y ) , d e v e l o p m e n t a l

psychologist R e n e e B a i l l a r g e o n a n d h e r associates have d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t in-

fants as y o u n g as 2i4 m o n t h s of a g e a p p e a r to possess early f o r m s of o b j e c t per-

m a n e n c e (Aguilar & Baillargeon, 1 9 9 9 ; B a i l l a r g e o n , 1 9 8 7 ) . S h e a n d o t h e r s

have asserted t h a t Piaget's m e t h o d s were i n a d e q u a t e t o m e a s u r e a c c u r a t e l y

the abilities of very y o u n g infants b e c a u s e they r e q u i r e d m o t o r skills that in-

fants do n o t possess.

Piaget's c o n c e p t s a n d discoveries have i n f l u e n c e d r e s e a r c h in a wide

variety o f f i e l d s . T h i s i s e v i d e n c e d b y t h e fact t h a t m o r e t h a n 5 0 scientific a r -

ticles e a c h y e a r cite t h e b o o k by P i a g e t t h a t f o r m s t h e basis f o r this discus-

sion. F o r e x a m p l e , o n e study c o m p a r e d 614-month-old infants' t e n d e n c y t o

s e a r c h for o b j e c t s h i d d e n b y d a r k n e s s t o t h e i r t e n d e n c y t o s e a r c h for o b j e c t s

h i d d e n u n d e r a c l o t h in t h e light, as in Piaget's g a m e s with his c h i l d r e n

(Shinskey & M u n a k a t a , 2 0 0 3 ) . Interestingly, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s f o u n d t h a t t h e

infants w e r e b e t t e r a t looking for o b j e c t s i n t h e d a r k c o m p a r e d t o s e a r c h i n g

for t h e m w h e n t h e o b j e c t s w e r e c o v e r e d by a c l o t h in t h e light. W h y would

this b e t r u e ? O n e e x p l a n a t i o n m a y b e t h a t t h e a p p e a r a n c e o f t h e c l o t h in-

t e r f e r e s with t h e infants' new, fragile ability to r e p r e s e n t t h e o b j e c t mentally.

A n a l t e r n a t e e x p l a n a t i o n may b e t h a t o u r ability t o think a b o u t , a n d s e a r c h

for, o b j e c t s in (potentially d a n g e r o u s ) d a r k n e s s was m o r e a d a p t i v e f r o m an

evolutionary, survival p e r s p e c t i v e t h a n d o i n g s o w h e n i t e m s a r e m e r e l y hid-

d e n in t h e light.

A n o t h e r fascinating study relating to Piaget's work found an association be-

tween infants' ability to differentiate a m o n g objects a n d their c o m p r e h e n s i o n of

the words for the objects (Rivera & Zawaydeh, 2 0 0 7 ) . Using preference-looking

142 Chapter V Human Development

techniques, this study revealed that infants at only 10 or 11 m o n t h s of age were

able to differentiate between objects only if they understood the words for both

objects. T h e authors p r o p o s e that ' T h e s e results suggest that c o m p r e h e n d i n g

t h e words for o c c l u d e d / d i s o c c l u d e d [hidden a n d revealed] objects provides a

kind of 'glue' which allows infants to bind t h e mental index of an object with its

perceptual features (thus precipitating the formation of two mental indexes,

r a t h e r than o n e ) " (p. 1 4 6 ) . T h a t is, knowing the n a m e s for objects appears to

help infants mentally store an image of an object as unique a n d recognizable in

c o m p a r i s o n with o t h e r objects.

An intriguing study citing Piaget's work on o b j e c t p e r m a n e n c e found an

association between d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e o b j e c t c o n c e p t a n d sleep i n 9 - m o n t h -

old infants ( S c h e r , Amir, & T i r o s h , 2 0 0 0 ) . T h e s e findings i n d i c a t e d that in-

fants with a m o r e a d v a n c e d g r a s p o f o b j e c t p e r m a n e n c e e x p e r i e n c e d

significantly fewer sleep difficulties t h a n those with lower levels of t h e o b j e c t

c o n c e p t . This may m a k e a c e r t a i n intuitive sense, if you think a b o u t it. If you

were n o t sure all y o u r stuff would still exist in t h e m o r n i n g , you probably

wouldn't sleep very well e i t h e r !

C O N C L U S I O N

As m e t h o d s have b e e n refined for studying infants' cognitive abilities, such as

p r e f e r e n c e - l o o k i n g a n d habituation-dishabituation techniques, s o m e o f Pi-

aget's discoveries a r e being drawn into question (for m o r e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t

these r e s e a r c h m e t h o d s , see R e a d i n g 5 on Fantz in this book; also, Craig &

D u n n , 2 0 0 7 ) . I n fact, n u m e r o u s o n g o i n g controversies s u r r o u n d i n g Piaget's

t h e o r y o f cognitive d e v e l o p m e n t a r e swirling t h r o u g h t h e f i e l d o f develop-

m e n t a l psychology. S u c h controversy is healthy; it motivates discussion a n d re-

s e a r c h t h a t will eventually lead to even g r e a t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d knowledge

a b o u t t h e s o u r c e s a n d growth o f h u m a n c o g n i t i o n .

C o n t r o v e r s y notwithstanding, Piaget's t h e o r y r e m a i n s t h e catalyst a n d

f o u n d a t i o n for all r e l a t e d r e s e a r c h . His work c o n t i n u e s to g u i d e e n l i g h t e n e d

people's ideas a b o u t r e s e a r c h with c h i l d r e n , m e t h o d s o f e d u c a t i o n , a n d styles

of p a r e n t i n g . Piaget's c o n t r i b u t i o n was a n d is i m m e a s u r a b l e .

Aguilar, A., & Baillargeon, R. ( 1 9 9 9 ) . 2.5-month-old infants' reasoning about when objects should and should not be occluded. Cognitive Psychology, 39(2), 1 1 6 - 1 5 7 .

Baillargeon, R. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . Object permanence in 3i4- and 4i4-month-oId infants. Developmental Psychology, 23, 6 5 5 - 6 6 4 .

Craig, G., & Dunn, W. ( 2 0 0 7 ) . Understanding human development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Ginzburg, H., & Opper, S. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Piaget's theory of intellectual development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Piaget, J . , & Inhelder, B. ( 1 9 6 9 ) . The psychology of the child. New York: Basic Books. Rivera, S., & Zawaydeh, A.N. ( 2 0 0 7 ) . Word comprehension facilitates object individuation in 10-

and 11-month-old infants. Brain Research, 1146, 1 4 6 - 1 5 7 . Scher, A., Amir, T., & Tirosh, E. ( 2 0 0 0 ) . Object concept and sleep regulation. Perceptual and Motor

Skills, 91(2), 4 0 2 - 4 0 4 . Shinskey, J„ & Munakata, Y. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Are infants in the dark about hidden objects? Developmental

Science, 6, 2 7 3 - 2 8 2 .

Reading 19 How Moral Are You ? 143

Reading 19: HOW MORAL ARE YOU? Kohlberg, L. (1963). The development of children's orientations toward a moral

order: Sequence in the development of moral thought. Vita Humana, 6,11-33.

Have you ever really t h o u g h t a b o u t how m o r a l you a r e c o m p a r e d to others?

W h a t a r e t h e m o r a l principles guiding y o u r decisions in life? E x p e r i e n c e

should tell you that people's morality varies a g r e a t deal. Psychologists g e n e r -

ally define m o r a l s as those attitudes a n d beliefs t h a t help p e o p l e d e c i d e t h e dif-

f e r e n c e between a n d d e g r e e s o f r i g h t a n d wrong. Y o u r c o n c e p t o f morality i s

d e t e r m i n e d by t h e rules a n d n o r m s of c o n d u c t that a r e set forth by t h e c u l t u r e

in which you have b e e n raised a n d that have b e e n internalized by you. Morality

is not p a r t of y o u r standard e q u i p m e n t at birth: you were probably b o r n with-

out morals. As you developed t h r o u g h c h i l d h o o d into a d o l e s c e n c e a n d adult-

h o o d , your ideas a b o u t right a n d wrong developed along with you. Every

n o r m a l adult has a personal c o n c e p t i o n of morality. B u t w h e r e did y o u r m o r a l -

ity originate? H o w did it go f r o m a set of cultural rules to p a r t of w h c you a r e ?

Probably the two most famous a n d influential figures in t h e history of re-

search on the f o r m a t i o n of morality were J e a n Piaget (discussed in Reading 1 8 )

a n d L a w r e n c e Kohlberg ( 1 9 2 7 - 1 9 8 7 ) . Kohlberg's r e s e a r c h a t the University o f

C h i c a g o i n c o r p o r a t e d a n d e x p a n d e d u p o n m a n y o f Piaget's ideas a b o u t intel-

lectual d e v e l o p m e n t a n d sparked a new wave of interest in this topic of study.

Kohlberg was addressing this question: "How does t h e a m o r a l infant b e c o m e ca-

pable of m o r a l reasoning?"

Using t h e work of Piaget as a starting point, Kohlberg theorized that t h e

uniquely h u m a n ability to m a k e m o r a l j u d g m e n t s develops in a predictable way

during c h i l d h o o d . He believed that specific, identifiable stages of m o r a l devel-

o p m e n t a r e related a n d similar in c o n c e p t to Piaget's stages of intellectual de-

velopment. As Kohlberg e x p l a i n e d , "The child c a n internalize t h e m o r a l values

of his parents a n d c u l t u r e a n d m a k e t h e m his own only as he c o m e s to relate

these values to a c o m p r e h e n d e d social o r d e r a n d to his own goals as a social

s e l f (Kohlberg, 1 9 6 4 ) . In o t h e r words, a child m u s t r e a c h a c e r t a i n stage of in-

tellectual ability in o r d e r to develop a c e r t a i n level of morality.

With these ideas in m i n d , K o h l b e r g set a b o u t f o r m u l a t i n g a m e t h o d for

studying children's abilities t o m a k e m o r a l j u d g m e n t s . F r o m t h a t r e s e a r c h

grew his widely r e c o g n i z e d t h e o r y of m o r a l d e v e l o p m e n t .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

W h e n Kohlberg asserted that morality is a c q u i r e d in developmental stages, he

was using the c o n c e p t of stage in a precise a n d formal way. It is easy to think of

nearly any ability as o c c u r r i n g in stages, but psychologists draw a clear distinction

between c h a n g e s that develop gradually over time (such as a person's height)

a n d those that develop in distinct a n d separate stages. So when Kohlberg re-

ferred to "structural moral stages in c h i l d h o o d a n d adolescence," he m e a n t that

(a) each stage is a uniquely different kind of m o r a l thinking a n d n o t just an

144 Chapter V Human Development

increased understanding of an adult c o n c e p t of morality; ( b ) the stages always

o c c u r in the same step-by-step sequence so that no stage is ever skipped and

t h e r e is rarely any backward progression; a n d ( c ) t h e stages a r e prepotent, mean-

ing that children c o m p r e h e n d all t h e stages below their own a n d perhaps have

s o m e understanding o f n o m o r e than o n e stage above. Children a r e incapable o f

understanding h i g h e r stages, regardless of e n c o u r a g e m e n t , teaching, or learn-

ing. F u r t h e r m o r e , children tend to function at the highest m o r a l stage they have

r e a c h e d . Also implied in this stage formulation of m o r a l development is the no-

tion that the stages a r e universal a n d o c c u r in the same order, regardless of indi-

vidual differences in environment, e x p e r i e n c e , or culture.

K o h l b e r g believed t h a t his t h e o r y o f t h e f o r m a t i o n o f morality c o u l d b e

e x p l o r e d by giving c h i l d r e n at various ages t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to m a k e m o r a l

j u d g m e n t s . I f t h e r e a s o n i n g they used t o m a k e m o r a l decisions c o u l d b e

f o u n d to p r o g r e s s predictably at i n c r e a s i n g ages, this would be e v i d e n c e that

his stage t h e o r y was essentially c o r r e c t .

M E T H O D

Kohlberg's r e s e a r c h m e t h o d o l o g y was really quite simple. He presented children

of varying ages with 10 hypothetical m o r a l dilemmas. E a c h child was interviewed

for 2 h o u r s a n d asked questions about t h e m o r a l issues presented in the dilem-

mas. T h e interviews were tape-recorded for later analysis of the m o r a l reasoning

used. Two of Kohlberg's most widely cited m o r a l dilemmas were as follows:

The Brother's Dilemma. Joe's father promised he could go to camp if he earned the $ 5 0 for it, and then changed his mind and asked J o e to give him the money he had earned. J o e lied and said he had only earned $10 and went to camp using the other $40 he had made. Before he went, he told his younger brother, Alex, about the money and about lying to their father. Should Alex tell their father? (p. 12)

The Heinz Dilemma. In Europe, a woman was near death from a special kind of can- cer. There was one drug that the doctors thought might save her. It was a form of ra- dium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging 10 times what the drug cost him to make. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2000 for a small dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1000, which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, "No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it" So Heinz got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should the husband have done this? (p. 17)

T h e p a r t i c i p a n t s in K o h l b e r g ' s original study were 72 boys living in t h e

C h i c a g o suburbs. T h e boys w e r e i n t h r e e different a g e g r o u p s : 1 0 , 1 3 , a n d 1 6

years. H a l f o f e a c h g r o u p o f boys w e r e f r o m lower-middle-class s o c i o e c o n o m i c

brackets; t h e o t h e r h a l f w e r e f r o m upper-middle-class brackets. During t h e

c o u r s e o f t h e 2 - h o u r interviews, t h e c h i l d r e n e x p r e s s e d between 5 0 a n d 1 5 0

m o r a l ideas o r statements.

Following a r e four e x a m p l e s q u o t e d by K o h l b e r g , of responses m a d e by

c h i l d r e n o f different ages t o these d i l e m m a s :

Reading 19 How Moral Are You ? 145

Danny, age 10, The Brothers Dilemma. "In one way it would be right to tell on his brother, or [else] his father might get mad at him and spank him. In another way it would be right to keep quiet, or [else] his brother might beat him up." (p. 12)

Don, age 13, The Heinz Dilemma. "It really was the druggist's fault, he was un- fair, trying to overcharge and letting someone die. Heinz loved his wife and wanted to save her. I think anyone would. I don't think they would put him in jail. The judge would look at all sides and see the druggist was charging too much." (p. 19)

Andy, age 13, The Brother's Dilemma. "If my father finds out later, he won't trust me. My brother wouldn't either, but I wouldn't [feel so bad] if he (the brother) didn't." (p. 20)

George, age 16, The Heinz Dilemma. "I don't think so, since it says the drug- gist had a right to set the price. I can't say he'd actually be right; I suppose any- one would do it for a wife, though. He'd prefer to go to jail than have his wife die. In my eyes he'd have just cause to do it, but in the law's eyes he'd be wrong. I can't say more than that as to whether it was right or wrong." (p. 21)

Based on such statements, K o h l b e r g a n d his associates defined six stages

o f m o r a l d e v e l o p m e n t a n d assigned various s t a t e m e n t s t o o n e o f t h e six

stages. In addition, six types of motives w e r e used to justify t h e boys' r e a s o n -

ing, which c o r r e s p o n d e d to t h e six stages. It should be n o t e d t h a t e a c h of t h e

six stages of m o r a l r e a s o n i n g d e l i n e a t e d by K o h l b e r g was i n t e n d e d to apply

universally t o any situation t h e child m i g h t e n c o u n t e r . T h e stages d o n o t p r e -

dict a specific a c t i o n a child m i g h t take when f a c e d with a real d i l e m m a , b u t

r a t h e r t h e reasoning t h e child would use in d e t e r m i n i n g a c o u r s e of a c t i o n .

R E S U L T S

K o h l b e r g g r o u p e d t h e six stages h e h a d f o u n d i n t o t h r e e m o r a l levels, e a c h

with distinct stages as outlined in Table 1 9 - 1 . T h e early stages of morality,

TABLE 19-1 Kohlberg's Six Stages of Moral Development

LEVEL 1. PREMORAL LEVEL

Stage 1. Punishment and obedience orientation (Consequences for actions deter- mine right and wrong.)

Stage 2. Naive instrumental hedonism (Satisfaction of one's own needs defines what is good.)

LEVEL 2. MORALITY OF CONVENTIONAL ROLE CONFORMITY

Stage 3. "Good boy-nice girl" orientation (What pleases others is good.) Stage 4. Authority maintaining morality (Maintaining law and order, doing one's duty

are good.)

LEVEL 3. MORALITY OF SELF-ACCEPTED MORAL PRINCIPLES

Stage 5. Morality of agreements and democratically determined law (Society's values and individual rights determine right and wrong.)

Stage 6. Morality of individual principles of conscience (Right and wrong are matters of individual philosophy according to universal principles.)

(Adapted from p. 13.)

146 Chapter V Human Development

which K o h l b e r g called t h e "premoral" level, a r e c h a r a c t e r i z e d by e g o c e n t r i s m

a n d p e r s o n a l interests. In stage 1, t h e child fails to r e c o g n i z e t h e interests of

o t h e r s a n d behaves morally o u t of fear of p u n i s h m e n t for bad behavior. In

stage 2, t h e child begins to r e c o g n i z e t h e interests a n d n e e d s of o t h e r s but be-

haves morally to g e t m o r a l behavior back. G o o d behavior is, in e s s e n c e , a ma-

nipulation of a situation to m e e t t h e child's own n e e d s .

In level 2, conventional morality that is a part of recognizing one's role in

interpersonal relationships c o m e s into play. In stage 3, the child behaves morally

in o r d e r to live up to t h e expectations of others a n d maintain trust a n d loyalty in

relationships. It is during this stage, a c c o r d i n g to Kohlberg, that "golden rule

thinking" begins a n d the child b e c o m e s c o n c e r n e d about the feelings of others

(similar to Piaget's notion of overcoming e g o c e n t r i c thinking). Stage 4 begins

with the child's recognition of and respect for law a n d order. H e r e , an individual

takes the viewpoint of the larger social system a n d sees g o o d behavior in terms of

being a law-abiding citizen. T h e r e is no questioning of the established social

o r d e r but r a t h e r the belief that whatever upholds the law is good.

W h e n a p e r s o n e n t e r s level 3 , j u d g m e n t s a b o u t morality begin t o tran-

s c e n d f o r m a l societal laws. In stage 5, t h e child r e c o g n i z e s t h a t s o m e laws a r e

b e t t e r t h a n o t h e r s . S o m e t i m e s what is m o r a l m a y n o t be legal, a n d vice versa.

T h e individual still believes t h a t laws s h o u l d be o b e y e d to m a i n t a i n social

h a r m o n y b u t m a y seek to c h a n g e laws t h r o u g h d u e p r o c e s s . At this stage,

K o h l b e r g m a i n t a i n e d , a p e r s o n will e x p e r i e n c e conflict in a t t e m p t i n g to in-

t e g r a t e morality with legality.

If a p e r s o n r e a c h e s morality stage 6 ( a n d n o t e v e r y o n e d o e s ) , m o r a l

j u d g m e n t s will be based u p o n a belief in universal ethical principles. W h e n

laws violate these principles, t h e p e r s o n behaves a c c o r d i n g to these ethical

principles, regardless of t h e law. Morality is d e t e r m i n e d by t h e individual's

own c o n s c i e n c e . K o h l b e r g was to find in this a n d l a t e r studies that very few in-

dividuals actually r e a c h stage 6. He eventually ascribed this level of r e a s o n i n g

t o g r e a t l e a d e r s o f c o n s c i e n c e , such a s G a n d h i , T h o r e a u , a n d Martin L u t h e r

King. J r . K o h l b e r g c l a i m e d that:

A motivational aspect of morality was defined by the motive mentioned by the subject in justifying moral action. Six levels of motive were isolated, each con- gruent with one of the developmental types. They were as follows: (1) punish- ment by another; (2) manipulation of goods or rewards by another; (3) disapproval by others; ( 4 ) censure by legitimate authorities followed by feelings of guilt; (5) community respect and disrespect; (6) self-condemnation, (p. 13)

It was c r u c i a l to K o h l b e r g ' s stage t h e o r y that t h e different levels of

m o r a l r e a s o n i n g a r e seen t o a d v a n c e with t h e a g e o f t h e p e r s o n . T o test this

idea, he analyzed t h e various stages c o r r e s p o n d i n g to t h e children's answers

a c c o r d i n g t o t h e ages o f t h e c h i l d r e n . F i g u r e 19-1 s u m m a r i z e s these findings:

a s t h e a g e o f t h e subjects i n c r e a s e d , t h e c h i l d r e n used increasingly h i g h e r

stages o f m o r a l r e a s o n i n g t o r e s p o n d t o t h e d i l e m m a s . O t h e r statistical analy-

ses d e m o n s t r a t e d that t h e ability to use e a c h stage a p p e a r e d to be a prerequi-

site to moving to t h e n e x t - h i g h e r level.

Reading 19 How Moral A re You ? 147

FIGURE 19-1 Stages of moral reasoning by age. "Kohlberg notes that the data for this group of 7-year- old boys were acquired from an additional group of 12. (Figures adapted from data on p. 15)

D I S C U S S I O N

I n Kohlberg's discussion o f t h e implications o f his findings, h e p o i n t e d o u t

that this new c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n clarified how c h i l d r e n actively o r g a n i z e t h e

morality of t h e world a r o u n d t h e m in a series of p r e d i c t a b l e , sequential stages.

F o r t h e child, this was n o t seen simply as an assimilation a n d internalization of

adult m o r a l t e a c h i n g s t h r o u g h verbal e x p l a n a t i o n a n d p u n i s h m e n t b u t a s a n

emergence of cognitive m o r a l s t r u c t u r e s t h a t d e v e l o p e d as a result of t h e child's

i n t e r a c t i o n with t h e social a n d cultural e n v i r o n m e n t . In this view, c h i l d r e n do

n o t simply l e a r n morality—they c o n s t r u c t it. W h a t this m e a n s is t h a t a child is

literally i n c a p a b l e of u n d e r s t a n d i n g or using stage 3 m o r a l r e a s o n i n g b e f o r e

passing t h r o u g h stages 1 a n d 2. A n d a p e r s o n would n o t apply t h e m o r a l c o n -

cepts of basic h u m a n rights f o u n d in stage 5 to solve a d i l e m m a unless t h a t

p e r s o n h a d already e x p e r i e n c e d a n d c o n s t r u c t e d t h e p a t t e r n s o f morality in-

h e r e n t i n t h e f i r s t four stages. F u r t h e r implications o f this a n d l a t e r work o f

Kohlberg a r e discussed shortly.

C R I T I C I S M S A N D R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

K o h l b e r g e x p a n d e d a n d revised his stage t h e o r y o f m o r a l d e v e l o p m e n t o v e r

m o r e than 30 years following this original study. As with m o s t new, influential

r e s e a r c h , his views have b e e n q u e s t i o n e d f r o m several perspectives. O n e of

t h e most often c i t e d criticisms is that even if K o h l b e r g was c o r r e c t in his ideas

148 Chapter V Human Development

a b o u t m o r a l reasoning, this d o e s n o t m e a n t h o s e ideas c a n b e applied t o

m o r a l behavior. In o t h e r words, what a p e r s o n thinks or says is m o r a l may not

be reflected in t h e p e r s o n ' s m o r a l a c t i o n s . Several studies have suggested a

lack o f c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between m o r a l r e a s o n i n g a n d m o r a l behavior, al-

t h o u g h o t h e r s have found e v i d e n c e that such a relationship d o e s exist. O n e

interesting line of r e s e a r c h r e l a t e d to this criticism focused on the i m p o r t a n c e

of s t r o n g situational f a c t o r s in d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r s o m e o n e will a c t a c c o r d -

ing t o his o r h e r stage o f m o r a l r e a s o n i n g (see Kurtines, 1 9 8 6 ) . A l t h o u g h this

criticism may have s o m e validity, K o h l b e r g a c k n o w l e d g e d that his t h e o r y ap-

plied only to m o r a l reasoning. T h e fact that situational f o r c e s may s o m e t i m e s

a l t e r m o r a l behavior d o e s n o t n e g a t e t h e fact, a c c o r d i n g to Kohlberg, that

m o r a l reasoning p r o g r e s s e s t h r o u g h t h e stages he described.

A n o t h e r criticism of Kohlberg's work has focused on his claim that the six

stages of m o r a l reasoning a r e universal. T h e s e critics claim that Kohlberg's

stages r e p r e s e n t an interpretation of morality that is found uniquely in Western

individualistic societies a n d may n o t apply to t h e non-Western, collectivist cul-

tures that m a k e up m o s t of t h e world's population (see Reading 28 on t h e re-

s e a r c h by Triandis for a discussion of the differences between these cultures).

However, in defense of t h e universality of Kohlberg's ideas, 45 separate studies

c o n d u c t e d in 27 different cultures were reviewed (Snarey, 1 9 8 7 ) . In every study

e x a m i n e d , r e s e a r c h e r s found that all the participants passed t h r o u g h the stages

in t h e same s e q u e n c e , without reversals, a n d that stages 1 t h r o u g h 5 were pre-

sent in all the cultures studied. Interestingly, however, in m o r e collectivist cul-

tures (e.g., Taiwan, P a p u a , New Guinea, a n d Israel), s o m e of the m o r a l

j u d g m e n t s did n o t fit into any of Kohlberg's six stages. T h e s e were j u d g m e n t s

based on t h e welfare of t h e entire community. Such reasoning was n o t found in

the j u d g m e n t s m a d e by U.S. participants (see Reading 28 on Triandis's r e s e a r c h

on individualistic a n d collectivist cultures later in this b o o k ) .

A third a r e a of criticism deals with t h e belief t h a t Kohlberg's stages of

m o r a l d e v e l o p m e n t may n o t apply equally t o males a n d females. T h e re-

s e a r c h e r w h o led this line of questioning was C a r o l Gilligan ( 1 9 8 2 ) . She main-

tained that girls a n d boys, w o m e n a n d m e n do n o t think a b o u t morality in the

s a m e way. In h e r r e s e a r c h , she f o u n d that, in making m o r a l decisions, w o m e n

talked m o r e t h a n m e n a b o u t i n t e r p e r s o n a l relationships, t h e responsibility

for o t h e r s , t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f avoiding h u r t i n g o t h e r s , a n d t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f

t h e c o n n e c t i o n s a m o n g p e o p l e . She called this f o u n d a t i o n u p o n which

w o m e n ' s morality rests a care orientation. Based on this g e n d e r difference, Gilli-

g a n h a s a r g u e d t h a t w o m e n will s c o r e lower on Kohlberg's scale b e c a u s e the

lower stages deal m o r e with these relationship issues (such as stage 3, which is

based primarily on building trust a n d loyalty in r e l a t i o n s h i p s ) . M e n , on t h e

o t h e r h a n d , Gilligan says, m a k e m o r a l decisions based on issues of j u s t i c e ,

which fit m o r e easily i n t o Kohlberg's highest stages. She c o n t e n d s that n e i t h e r

of these a p p r o a c h e s to morality is superior, a n d t h a t if w o m e n a r e j u d g e d by

K o h l b e r g to be at a lower m o r a l level t h a n m e n , it is b e c a u s e of an uninten-

tional g e n d e r bias built into Kohlberg's theory.

Reading 19 How Moral Are You ? 149

O t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s , for t h e m o s t p a r t , have failed t o f i n d s u p p o r t for

Gilligan's assertion. Several studies have f o u n d no significant g e n d e r differ-

e n c e s in m o r a l r e a s o n i n g using Kohlberg's m e t h o d s . Gilligan has r e s p o n d e d

to those negative findings by acknowledging t h a t a l t h o u g h w o m e n a r e capable

of using all levels of m o r a l reasoning, in t h e i r real lives they c h o o s e n o t to do

so. Instead, w o m e n focus on t h e h u m a n relationship aspects discussed in t h e

p r e c e d i n g p a r a g r a p h . This has b e e n d e m o n s t r a t e d by r e s e a r c h showing how

girls a r e willing to m a k e a g r e a t e r effort to h e l p a n o t h e r p e r s o n in n e e d a n d

tend t o s c o r e h i g h e r o n tests o f e m o t i o n a l e m p a t h y (see H o f f m a n , 1 9 7 7 , for a

m o r e c o m p l e t e discussion o f these g e n d e r issues).

Kohlberg's early work o n the d e v e l o p m e n t o f m o r a l j u d g m e n t c o n t i n u e s

to be cited in studies from a wide r a n g e of disciplines. O n e a r e a of r e s e a r c h

that relied on Kohlberg's study e x a m i n e d t h e effects of women's a l c o h o l abuse

during p r e g n a n c y on their children's m o r a l d e v e l o p m e n t (Schonfeld, Matt-

son, & Riley, 2 0 0 5 ) . A l t h o u g h evidence is c l e a r that a l c o h o l abuse d u r i n g preg-

nancy suppresses intelligence scores in e x p o s e d children, this study also found

that "Children a n d adolescents with histories of p r e n a t a l a l c o h o l e x p o s u r e

d e m o n s t r a t e d lower overall m o r a l maturity c o m p a r e d with t h e c o n t r o l g r o u p .

A c c o r d i n g t o Kohlberg's stages o f m o r a l d e v e l o p m e n t , t h e [ a l c o h o l e x p o s e d ]

g r o u p was primarily c o n c e r n e d with minimizing negative c o n s e q u e n c e s to self

(i.e., Stage 2 ) , whereas t h e c o n t r o l g r o u p d e m o n s t r a t e d c o n c e r n for o t h e r s

a n d what i s socially n o r m a t i v e (i.e., Stage 3 ) " ( p p . 5 5 0 - 5 5 1 ) .

A n o t h e r study citing K o h l b e r g ' s t h e o r y e x a m i n e d t h e a c c u r a c y o f eye-

witness testimony given by c h i l d r e n ( B o t t o m s et al., 2 0 0 2 ) . C h i l d r e n between

t h e ages of t h r e e a n d six p a r t i c i p a t e d in a play session with t h e i r m o t h e r s . H a l f

of t h e c h i l d r e n were told n o t to play with c e r t a i n toys in t h e r o o m . However,

when t h e r e s e a r c h e r left, t h e children's m o t h e r s u r g e d t h e m to play with t h e

"forbidden" toys but to "keep it a secret." L a t e r t h e r e s e a r c h e r s interviewed

t h e c h i l d r e n a n d asked if they h a d played with t h e p r o h i b i t e d toys. "Results in-

d i c a t e d that o l d e r c h i l d r e n w h o w e r e i n s t r u c t e d to k e e p events s e c r e t with-

held m o r e i n f o r m a t i o n t h a n did o l d e r c h i l d r e n n o t told t o k e e p events secret.

Y o u n g e r children's r e p o r t s were n o t significandy affected by t h e s e c r e t m a -

nipulation" ( p . 2 8 5 ) . Often, c h i l d r e n a r e told b y adults t o k e e p secrets a b o u t

t h e adults' illegal or injurious activities. U n d e r s t a n d i n g when t h e i r u n d e r -

standing of t h e use a n d m e a n i n g of secrecy m a y play an i m p o r t a n t r o l e in t h e

use of child eyewitness testimony in legal p r o c e e d i n g s (see R e a d i n g 16 on

Loftus's r e s e a r c h on eyewitness testimony e a r l i e r in this b o o k ) .

C O N C L U S I O N

Dialogue a n d d e b a t e on Kohlberg's work has c o n t i n u e d to t h e p r e s e n t a n d

shows every sign of c o n t i n u i n g into the future. Its ultimate validity a n d i m p o r -

t a n c e r e m a i n to be clearly defined. However, few new conceptualizations of

h u m a n d e v e l o p m e n t have p r o d u c e d t h e a m o u n t o f r e s e a r c h , speculation, a n d

d e b a t e t h a t s u r r o u n d s K o h l b e r g ' s t h e o r y o f m o r a l d e v e l o p m e n t . A n d its

150 Chapter V Human Development

Reading 20: IN CONTROL AND GLAD OF IT! Langer, E. J . , & Rodin, J. (1976). The effects of choice and enhanced personal re-

sponsibility for the aged: A field experiment in an institutional setting. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 34,191-198.

C o n t r o l . This seemingly small psychological c o n c e p t may be the single most

i m p o r t a n t influence o n all o f h u m a n behavior. W h a t w e a r e talking a b o u t h e r e

is n o t y o u r ability to c o n t r o l t h e actions of o t h e r s but t h e personal power you

possess o v e r y o u r own life a n d t h e events in it. Related to this ability a r e your

feelings o f c o m p e t e n c e a n d personal p o w e r a n d t h e availability o f c h o i c e s i n

any given situation. Most of us feel that we have at least s o m e c o n t r o l over o u r

individual destinies. You have m a d e c h o i c e s in your life—some g o o d ones, a n d

maybe s o m e p o o r o n e s — a n d they have b r o u g h t you to w h e r e you a r e today.

A n d although you may n o t consciously think a b o u t it, you will m a k e many

m o r e c h o i c e s t h r o u g h o u t y o u r life. E a c h day you m a k e c h o i c e s a n d decisions

a b o u t y o u r behavior. W h e n y o u r sense of c o n t r o l is t h r e a t e n e d , you e x p e r i e n c e

negative feelings (anger, o u t r a g e , i n d i g n a t i o n ) a n d will rebel by behaving in

ways that will r e s t o r e y o u r p e r c e p t i o n of personal f r e e d o m . It's t h e well-worn

idea that if s o m e o n e tells you that you have to do something, you may r e s p o n d

usefulness to society, in o n e sense, was p r e d i c t e d by Kohlberg in this q u o t e

f r o m 1 9 6 4 :

Although any conception of moral education must recognize that the parent cannot escape the direct imposition of behavior demands and moral judgments upon the child, it may be possible to define moral education primarily as a mat- ter of stimulating the development of the child's own moral judgment and its control of action. . . . [I] have found teachers telling 13-year-olds not to cheat "because the person you copied from might have it wrong and so it won't do you any good." Most of these children were capable of advancing much more mature reasons for not cheating. . . . Children are almost as likely to reject moral rea- soning beneath their level as to fail to assimilate reasoning too far above their level, (p. 4 2 5 )

Bottoms, B., Goodman, G., Schwartz-Kenney, B., & Thomas, S. ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Children's use of secrecy in the context of eyewitness reports. Law and Human Behavior, 26, 2 8 5 - 3 1 3 .

Gilligan, C. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Hoffman, M. L. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . Sex differences in empathy and related behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 7 1 2 - 7 2 2 .

Kohlberg, L. ( 1 9 6 4 ) . Development of moral character and moral ideology. In H. Hoffman & L. Hoffman (Eds.), Review of child development research (Vol. 1 ) . New York: Russell-Sage Foun- dation.

Kurtines, W. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . Moral behavior as rule-governed behavior: Person and situation effect on moral decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 784—791.

Schonfeld, A., Mattson, S., & Riley, E. ( 2 0 0 5 ) . Moral maturity and delinquency after prenatal alcohol exposure. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 66(4), 5 4 5 - 5 5 4 .

Snarey, J. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . A question of morality. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 2 0 2 - 2 3 2 .

Reading 20 In Control and Glad of It! 151

by e i t h e r refusing or by d o i n g e x a c d y t h e opposite. Or, conversely, try to forbid

s o m e o n e from doing s o m e t h i n g a n d they will find t h a t activity m o r e attractive

than they did before i t was forbidden ( r e m e m b e r R o m e o a n d J u l i e t ? ) . This

t e n d e n c y to resist any a t t e m p t to limit o u r f r e e d o m is called reactance.

If o u r n e e d to c o n t r o l o u r personal environment is as basic to h u m a n na-

ture as it appears to be, what do you think would h a p p e n if that c o n t r o l were

taken away from you a n d you were unable to get it back? You would very likely ex-

p e r i e n c e psychological distress that could take t h e f o r m of anxiety, anger, out-

rage, depression, helplessness, a n d even physical illness. Studies have shown that

when people a r e placed in stressful situations, the negative effects of t h e stress

can be r e d u c e d if the participants believe they have s o m e c o n t r o l over t h e stress-

ful event. F o r e x a m p l e , people in a crowded elevator perceive t h e elevator to be

less crowded a n d feel less anxiety if they a r e standing n e x t to the c o n t r o l panel in

the elevator car; they believe they have a g r e a t e r sense of c o n t r o l over their envi-

r o n m e n t regardless of whether they use the c o n t r o l to "escape" (Rodin,

Solomon, & Metcalf, 1 9 7 9 ) . A n o t h e r well-known line of r e s e a r c h has d e m o n -

strated that when people perceive that they have c o n t r o l over a stressful situa-

tion, their stress is r e d u c e d (see Glass & Singer, 1 9 7 2 ) . F o r e x a m p l e , o n e study

e x p o s e d participants t o loud bursts o f noise a n d t h e n h a d t h e m p e r f o r m

problem-solving tasks. O n e g r o u p h a d no c o n t r o l over the noise. A n o t h e r g r o u p

was told that they could press a button a n d stop the noise at any time. However,

they were asked not to press the button if they could avoid it. Participants in the

no-control g r o u p p e r f o r m e d significandy worse on t h e tasks than the partici-

pants who believed they could e x e r t c o n t r o l over the noise. By the way, n o n e of

the participants in this latter g r o u p actually pressed the button, so they were ex-

posed to just as m u c h noise as the g r o u p that h a d no p e r c e p t i o n of control.

W h a t this all boils down to is t h a t we a r e h a p p i e r a n d m o r e effective p e o -

ple when we have t h e power to c h o o s e . Unfortunately, in o u r society, m a n y

people's lives r e a c h a stage when they lose this p o w e r a n d a r e no l o n g e r al-

lowed to m a k e even t h e simplest of c h o i c e s for themselves. This life stage is

called old age. Many of us have h e a r d a b o u t or e x p e r i e n c e d firsthand t h e

tragic sudden d e c l i n e in alertness a n d physical h e a l t h of an elderly p e r s o n

when he or she has b e e n p l a c e d in a r e t i r e m e n t or nursing h o m e . Illnesses

such as h e a r t disease, depression, diabetes, a n d colitis have b e e n linked to

feelings o f helplessness a n d loss o f p e r s o n a l c o n t r o l . O n e o f t h e m o s t difficult

transitions elderly p e o p l e m u s t e n d u r e w h e n e n t e r i n g a nursing h o m e is t h e

loss of t h e p e r s o n a l p o w e r to m a k e c h o i c e s a b o u t t h e i r daily activities, to in-

fluence their life's destinies. L a n g e r a n d R o d i n , w h o h a d b e e n studying these

issues of p o w e r a n d c o n t r o l for s o m e time p r i o r to t h e study we c o n s i d e r h e r e ,

d e c i d e d to put these ideas to t h e test in a real nursing h o m e .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

If the loss of personal responsibility for one's life causes a person to be less happy

a n d healthy, then increasing c o n t r o l a n d power should have the opposite effect.

L a n g e r a n d Rodin wanted to test this theoretical idea direcdy by e n h a n c i n g

152 Chapter V Human Development

p e r s o n a l power a n d c h o i c e for a g r o u p of nursing h o m e residents. Based on

previous literature a n d their own earlier studies, they p r e d i c t e d that the patients

given this c o n t r o l should d e m o n s t r a t e i m p r o v e m e n t s in m e n t a l alertness, activ-

ity level, satisfaction with life, a n d o t h e r m e a s u r e s of behavior a n d attitude.

M E T H O D

Participants

L a n g e r a n d R o d i n o b t a i n e d t h e c o o p e r a t i o n o f a C o n n e c t i c u t nursing h o m e ,

A r d e n H o u s e . This facility was r a t e d by t h e state as o n e of t h e finest c a r e units

in t h e a r e a , offering high-quality m e d i c a l c a r e , r e c r e a t i o n a l facilities, a n d resi-

dential c o m f o r t s . It was a l a r g e a n d m o d e r n h o m e with four residential floors.

T h e residents in t h e h o m e w e r e all of generally similar physical a n d psycho-

logical h e a l t h a n d c a m e f r o m similar s o c i o e c o n o m i c b a c k g r o u n d s . W h e n a

new r e s i d e n t e n t e r e d t h e h o m e , he or she was assigned to a r o o m on t h e basis

o f availability, m o r e o r less a t r a n d o m . C o n s e q u e n d y , t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e

residents on all floors w e r e , on a v e r a g e , equivalent. Two floors were r a n d o m l y

selected for t h e two t r e a t m e n t conditions. F o u r t h - f l o o r residents ( 8 m e n a n d

3 9 w o m e n ) r e c e i v e d t h e "increased-responsibility" t r e a t m e n t . T h e s e c o n d

floor was d e s i g n a t e d a s t h e c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p ( 9 m e n a n d 3 5 w o m e n ) ; their

level of p e r s o n a l responsibility was relatively u n c h a n g e d . T h e s e 91 partici-

p a n t s r a n g e d i n a g e f r o m 6 5 t o 9 0 .

P r o c e d u r e

T h e nursing h o m e a d m i n i s t r a t o r a g r e e d to work with t h e r e s e a r c h e r s in im-

p l e m e n t i n g t h e two c o n d i t i o n s . He was d e s c r i b e d as an o u t g o i n g a n d friendly

33-year-old w h o i n t e r a c t e d with t h e residents daily. He called a m e e t i n g of the

r e s i d e n t s o f t h e two floors w h e r e h e gave t h e m s o m e new i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t

t h e h o m e . T h e administrator's two messages i n f o r m e d t h e residents a b o u t t h e

h o m e ' s desire t h a t t h e i r lives t h e r e be as c o m f o r t a b l e a n d pleasant as possible

a n d several o f t h e services t h a t w e r e available t o t h e m . However, s o m e i m p o r -

tant differences for t h e two g r o u p s w e r e i n t e g r a t e d within these messages.

T h e residents i n t h e responsibility-induced g r o u p ( f o u r t h floor) were

told t h a t they h a d t h e responsibility o f c a r i n g for themselves a n d deciding

how they should s p e n d t h e i r t i m e . He went on to explain t h e following:

You should be deciding how you want your room arranged—whether you want it to be as it is or whether you want the staff to help you rearrange the furniture.... It's your responsibility to make your complaints known to us, to tell us what you would like to change, to tell us what you would like. Also, I wanted to take this opportunity to give each of you a present from Arden House. [A box of small plants was passed around and the patients were asked to make two decisions: first, whether or not they wanted a plant at all, and second, to choose which one they wanted. All residents selected a plant.] The plants are yours to keep and take care of as you'd like.

One last thing: I wanted to tell you that we're showing a movie two nights next week, Thursday and Friday. You should decide which night you'd like to go, if you choose to see it at all. (p. 194)

Reading 20 In Control and Glad of It! 153

T h e c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p ( s e c o n d f l o o r ) was told h o w m u c h t h e staff a t

t h e h o m e wanted t o m a k e t h e i r lives fuller a n d m o r e interesting. H e e x -

plained t h e following to t h e m :

We want your rooms to be as nice as they can be and we've tried to make them that way for you. We want you to be happy here. We feel that it's our responsibil- ity to make this a home you can be proud of and happy in and we'll do all we can to help you. . . . Also, I wanted to take this opportunity to give you each a pre- sent from Arden House. [The nurse walked around with a box of plants and each patient was handed one.] The plants are yours to keep. The nurses will water and care for them for you.

One last thing: I wanted to tell you that we're showing a movie next week on Thursday and Friday. We'll let you know later which day you're scheduled to see it. (p. 194)

T h r e e days later, t h e d i r e c t o r went a r o u n d t o e a c h resident's r o o m a n d reiter-

a t e d t h e s a m e message.

It's n o t difficult to see what t h e i m p o r t a n t difference was between these

two messages. T h e fourth-floor g r o u p was given t h e o p p o r t u n i t y to m a k e

c h o i c e s a n d e x e r c i s e c o n t r o l over t h e i r lives in various ways. T h e second-floor

g r o u p , while o t h e r factors were basically t h e s a m e , was given t h e m e s s a g e that

m o s t of their decisions would be m a d e for t h e m . T h e s e policies w e r e t h e n fol-

lowed on these two floors for t h e n e x t 3 weeks. (It is i m p o r t a n t to n o t e t h a t

t h e level of c o n t r o l given to t h e fourth-floor residents was always available to

all residents at t h e h o m e if they r e q u e s t e d it. F o r this e x p e r i m e n t , it was sim-

ply r e i t e r a t e d a n d m a d e c l e a r e r t o t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p . )

Measuring the O u t c o m e s

Several m e t h o d s of m e a s u r e m e n t ( d e p e n d e n t variables) were used in this

study to d e t e r m i n e if t h e different responsibility c o n d i t i o n s would m a k e a dif-

f e r e n c e . Two questionnaires were administered 1 week b e f o r e t h e d i r e c t o r ' s

talk a n d again 3 weeks after. O n e questionnaire was given to t h e residents; it

asked questions a b o u t how m u c h c o n t r o l they felt they h a d a n d how active a n d

happy they were at the h o m e . T h e o t h e r questionnaire was given to nurses on

e a c h f l o o r (who were n o t aware o f t h e r e s e a r c h being c o n d u c t e d ) , asking t h e m

to r a t e patients on 10-point scales for how happy, alert, d e p e n d e n t , sociable,

a n d active they were a n d a b o u t their sleeping a n d eating habits. Two m e a s u r e s

of the residents' actual behavior were also r e c o r d e d : ( a ) t h e staff kept a r e c o r d

of the a t t e n d a n c e at t h e movie that was being shown the n e x t week a n d ( b ) a

contest was held for patients to guess t h e n u m b e r of jelly b e a n s in a l a r g e j a r ; if

residents wished to e n t e r t h e contest, they simply wrote their guess a n d their

n a m e on a slip of p a p e r a n d p l a c e d it in a b o x n e x t to t h e j a r .

R E S U L T S

Table 20-1 summarizes the results of the two questionnaires. As you c a n see

clearly, the differences between t h e groups were striking, a n d they s u p p o r t e d

L a n g e r a n d Rodin's predictions a b o u t the positive effects of c h o i c e a n d personal

154 Chapter V Human Development

TABLE 20-1 Summary of Questionnaire Responses

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FIRST AND SECOND ADMINISTRATION

INCREASED- QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSIBILITY COMPARISON SIGNIFICANT ITEM GROUP GROUP DIFFERENCE?

RESIDENTS SELF-REPORT: • Happy +0.28 -0.12 Y E S • Active +0.20 -1.28 Y E S • Interviewer's rating of alertness +0.29 -0.37 Y E S NURSES' RATINGS: • General improvement + 3.97 -2.39 Y E S • Time spent:

—visiting other patients +6.78 -3.30 Y E S —visiting others +2.14 -4.16 Y E S —talking to staff +8.21 + 1.61 Y E S —watching staff -2.14 +4.64 Y E S

(Adapted from p 195.)

power. T h e residents in t h e increased-responsibility g r o u p r e p o r t e d that they

felt h a p p i e r a n d m o r e active than those in t h e c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p . Also, the in-

terviewer's rating of alertness was h i g h e r for t h e fourth-floor residents. All these

differences were statistically significant. Even g r e a t e r differences were seen on

t h e nurses' ratings. K e e p in m i n d that the nurses who rated the patients were

"blind" ( u n i n f o r m e d ) as to the two t r e a t m e n t conditions to avoid any bias in

their ratings. T h e y d e t e r m i n e d that, overall, the increased-responsibility group's

condition improved markedly over the 3 weeks of the study, while the c o m p a r i -

son g r o u p in g e n e r a l was seen to decline. In fact, " 9 3 % of the e x p e r i m e n t a l

g r o u p (all but o n e participant) were considered improved, whereas only 2 1 % o f

t h e c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p (six participants) showed this positive c h a n g e " (p. 1 9 6 ) .

Fourth-floor residents took to visiting o t h e r s m o r e a n d spent considerably m o r e

time talking to various staff m e m b e r s . On the o t h e r h a n d , the increased-

responsibility residents b e g a n to spend less time e n g a g e d in passive activities

such as simply watching t h e staff.

T h e behavioral m e a s u r e s a d d e d f u r t h e r s u p p o r t t o t h e positive effects o f

p e r s o n a l c o n t r o l . Significandy m o r e participants f r o m t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l

g r o u p a t t e n d e d t h e movie. This difference in a t t e n d a n c e was n o t found for a

movie shown 1 m o n t h previously. A l t h o u g h t h e jelly b e a n guessing c o n t e s t

may have s e e m e d a s o m e w h a t silly m e a s u r e m e n t for a scientific study, the re-

sults w e r e quite interesting. A m o n g t h e fourth-floor residents, 10 p a r t i c i p a t e d

in t h e g a m e , but only 1 second-floor patient did so.

D I S C U S S I O N

L a n g e r a n d R o d i n p o i n t e d o u t that their study, c o m b i n e d with o t h e r previous

r e s e a r c h , d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t w h e n p e o p l e w h o have b e e n f o r c e d t o give u p

t h e i r c o n t r o l a n d decision-making p o w e r a r e given a g r e a t e r sense of personal

Reading 20 In Control and Glad of It! 1 5 5

responsibility, t h e i r lives a n d attitudes i m p r o v e . As to t h e p r a c t i c a l applica-

t i o n s o f this r e s e a r c h , t h e a u t h o r s a r e s u c c i n c t a n d t o t h e point:

Mechanisms can and should be established for changing situational factors that reduce real or perceived responsibility in the elderly. Furthermore, this study adds to the body of literature suggesting that senility and diminished alertness are not an almost inevitable result of aging. In fact, it suggests that some of the negative consequences of aging may be retarded, reversed, or possibly prevented by returning to the aged the right to make decisions and a feeling of compe- tence, (p. 197)

S I G N I F I C A N C E O F F I N D I N G S A N D S U B S E Q U E N T R E S E A R C H

Probably t h e best e x a m p l e of t h e significance of t h e findings of this study was

provided by t h e a u t h o r s in a subsequent study of t h e s a m e residents in t h e

s a m e nursing h o m e (Rodin & L a n g e r , 1 9 7 7 ) . E i g h t e e n m o n t h s after t h e i r f i r s t

study, L a n g e r a n d R o d i n r e t u r n e d to A r d e n H o u s e for a follow-up to see if t h e

increased-responsibility c o n d i t i o n s h a d any l o n g - t e r m effects. F o r t h e patients

still in r e s i d e n c e , ratings w e r e taken f r o m d o c t o r s a n d nurses a n d a special

talk on psychology a n d aging by o n e of t h e a u t h o r s ( J . R o d i n ) was given to t h e

residents. T h e n u m b e r o f residents i n e a c h o f t h e original c o n d i t i o n s w h o at-

t e n d e d t h e talk was r e c o r d e d a n d t h e f r e q u e n c y a n d type of questions asked

were n o t e d .

Ratings f r o m t h e nurses d e m o n s t r a t e d c o n t i n u e d s u p e r i o r c o n d i t i o n o f

t h e increased-responsibility g r o u p . T h e a v e r a g e total ratings (derived by

adding all their ratings t o g e t h e r a n d averaging this total o v e r all p a t i e n t s ) for

the e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p was 3 5 2 . 3 3 versus 2 6 2 . 0 0 for t h e c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p ( a

highly significant d i f f e r e n c e ) . T h e h e a l t h ratings f r o m d o c t o r s also i n d i c a t e d

an i n c r e a s e in overall health status for t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l g r o u p , c o m p a r e d

with a slight decline in h e a l t h for t h e c o n t r o l residents. A l t h o u g h no signifi-

c a n t difference was n o t e d i n t h e n u m b e r o f residents a t t e n d i n g t h e l e c t u r e ,

m o s t of t h e questions w e r e asked by t h e increased-responsibility p a r t i c i p a n t s

a n d the c o n t e n t o f t h e questions r e l a t e d t o a u t o n o m y a n d i n d e p e n d e n c e .

Probably t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t finding of all was t h a t 3 0 % of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s in

t h e c o m p a r i s o n g r o u p h a d died d u r i n g t h e 1 8 - m o n t h interval. F o r t h e e x p e r -

imental g r o u p , only 1 5 % h a d died d u r i n g t h a t t i m e .

O n e i m p o r t a n t criticism of r e s e a r c h such as this was p o i n t e d o u t by

L a n g e r a n d Rodin themselves. T h e c o n s e q u e n c e s o f i n t e r v e n t i o n b y r e -

s e a r c h e r s in any setting w h e r e t h e well-being of t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s is involved

m u s t b e very carefully c o n s i d e r e d f r o m a n ethical perspective. Providing t h e

elderly with new levels of p o w e r a n d c o n t r o l , only to have this responsibility

taken away again w h e n t h e r e s e a r c h is c o m p l e t e d , m i g h t be h a r m f u l or even

d a n g e r o u s to t h e participants. I n d e e d , a study by Schulz ( 1 9 7 6 ) allowed nurs-

ing h o m e residents varying a m o u n t s of c o n t r o l over when they would be vis-

ited by local c o l l e g e students. T h o s e having t h e m o s t c o n t r o l over w h e n a n d

for how long t h e visits would take p l a c e showed significandy i m p r o v e d func-

tioning, j u s t as L a n g e r a n d Rodin found. However, when t h e study was c o m -

pleted a n d t h e students d i s c o n t i n u e d t h e i r visits, this (inadvertently on t h e

156 Chapter V Human Development

p a r t o f t h e r e s e a r c h e r s ) led t o a g r e a t e r d e c l i n e i n t h e h e a l t h o f t h e e x p e r i -

m e n t a l g r o u p c o m p a r e d t o t h o s e r e s i d e n t s w h o w e r e n e v e r e x p o s e d t o t h e

i n c r e a s e d - c o n t r o l situation. In L a n g e r a n d Rodin's study, this did n o t h a p p e n ,

b e c a u s e feelings o f g e n e r a l c o n t r o l o v e r n o r m a l day-to-day decision making

w e r e fostered a m o n g all t h e residents. This, t h e n , was a positive c h a n g e that

was t h e r e f o r e c o n t i n u e d over time with sustained positive results.

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

As m e n t i o n e d previously, p e r s o n a l power a n d c o n t r o l over one's life consti-

tute a key f a c t o r in a happy a n d p r o d u c t i v e life. O l d a g e is a time when t h e po-

tential exists for this power to be lost. L a n g e r a n d Rodin's studies a n d the

subsequent work o f J u d i t h R o d i n (see R o d i n , 1 9 8 6 ) have m a d e i t c l e a r that

t h e g r e a t e r o u r sense o f c o n t r o l , t h e healthier, happier, a n d s m o o t h e r o u r

p r o c e s s of aging. Awareness of this is growing even today as nursing h o m e s ,

state nursing h o m e certification b o a r d s , hospitals, a n d o t h e r institutional set-

t i n g s e n c o u r a g e a n d r e q u i r e i n c r e a s e d c h o i c e , p e r s o n a l power, a n d c o n t r o l

for t h e elderly.

M a n y studies i n c o r p o r a t i n g L a n g e r a n d R o d i n ' s 1 9 7 6 r e s e a r c h have

c o n t i n u e d t o s u p p o r t t h e n e e d for, a n d value of, p e r s o n a l c o n t r o l a s w e a g e .

F o r e x a m p l e , a 2 0 0 3 study o f d e p r e s s i o n a m o n g elderly r e s i d e n t s i n s e n i o r

citizen h o m e s i n G e r m a n y f o u n d t h a t a lack o f p e r c e i v e d f r e e d o m a n d p e r -

s o n a l c h o i c e w e r e p r e d i c t o r s o f depressive s y m p t o m s , p o o r physical f i t n e s s ,

a n d a lack o f social s u p p o r t ( K r a m p e e t al., 2 0 0 3 ) . T h e a u t h o r s c o n c l u d e d

t h a t "therapy a n d p r e v e n t i o n o f d e p r e s s i o n a m o n g i n h a b i t a n t s o f old p e o -

ple's r e s i d e n c e s s h o u l d i n c l u d e b o t h p r o m o t i o n o f volitional self-regulation

[ p e r s o n a l c h o i c e ] a n d i m p r o v e m e n t o f p e r c e i v e d f r e e d o m b e c a u s e e a c h o f

t h e s e f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e s i n d e p e n d e n t l y t o t h e e x p l a n a t i o n o f d e p r e s s i o n "

( p . 1 1 7 ) .

On t h e o t h e r h a n d , c a n a p e r s o n have too m a n y choices? A fascinating

study e x a m i n e d t h e effects o f offering p e o p l e a limited n u m b e r o f c h o i c e s

c o m p a r e d to a l a r g e a r r a y of c h o i c e s ( I y e n g a r & L e p p e r , 2 0 0 0 ) . In b o t h field

a n d lab settings, p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e offered an o p p o r t u n i t y to p u r c h a s e

g o u r m e t j a m s or c h o c o l a t e s or to write an e x t r a c r e d i t essay in a class. S o m e

p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e given 6 c h o i c e s of items or topics, while o t h e r s were given 24

o r 3 0 options. T h e results w e r e strikingly clear. P e o p l e w e r e u p t o 1 0 t i m e s

m o r e likely t o buy j a m o r c h o c o l a t e s w h e n they h a d 6 c h o i c e s c o m p a r e d t o 3 0 .

I n addition, significanüy m o r e students o p t e d t o write t h e e x t r a c r e d i t e x a m

when they w e r e given t h e smaller n u m b e r o f t o p i c c h o i c e s . "Participants actu-

ally r e p o r t e d g r e a t e r s u b s e q u e n t satisfaction with t h e i r selection a n d wrote

b e t t e r essays w h e n t h e i r original set o f o p t i o n s h a d b e e n limited" (p. 9 9 5 ) .

W h e t h e r f i n d i n g s a b o u t j a m a n d s t u d e n t essays may b e applied t o nursing

h o m e e m p o w e r m e n t p r o g r a m s has yet t o b e investigated; however, c o m m o n

sense suggests t h a t similar effects m i g h t well be o b t a i n e d if elderly p e o p l e ( o r

a n y o n e ) were t o b e o v e r w h e l m e d with t o o m a n y c h o i c e s .

Reading 20 In Control and Glad of It! 157

C O N C L U S I O N

You c a n see t h a t p e r s o n a l p o w e r a n d c o n t r o l n o t only affect y o u r happiness,

but they also c a n m a k e y o u healthier. You c a n easily apply L a n g e r a n d Rodin's

ideas to y o u r own life. T h i n k for a m o m e n t a b o u t events, settings, a n d e x p e r i -

e n c e s i n which y o u w e r e allowed v e r y little p e r s o n a l c o n t r o l o v e r y o u r b e -

havior; t h e situation "forced" y o u to b e h a v e in specific ways. You probably

r e m e m b e r those e x p e r i e n c e s a s m o r e u n c o m f o r t a b l e , m o r e u n p l e a s a n t , a n d

significantly less enjoyable t h a n events w h e r e you c o u l d freely c h o o s e what to

d o a n d how t o a c t . I n m o s t o f life's situations, increasing y o u r d e g r e e o f be-

havioral c h o i c e s , a n d t h o s e of o t h e r s ' , is a goal clearly w o r t h pursuing.

Glass, C., & Singe^J. ( 1 9 7 2 ) . Urban stress: Experiments on noise and social stressors. New York: Acade- mic Press.

Iyengar, S., & Lepper, M. ( 2 0 0 0 ) . When choice is demotivating: Can one desire too much of a good thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 995—1006.

Krampe, H., Hautzinger, M., Ehrenreich, H., & Kroner-Herwig, B. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Depression among elderly living in senior citizen homes: Investigation of a multifactorial model of depres- sion. Zeitschrift fur klinische psychologic und psychotherapie, 32, 1 1 7 - 1 2 8 .

Rodin,J. ( 1 9 8 6 ) . Aging and health: Effects of the sense of control. Science, 233, 1 2 7 1 - 1 2 7 6 . Rodin, J . , & Langer, E . J . ( 1 9 7 7 ) . Long-term effects of a control relevant intervention with the in-

stitutionalized aged. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35, 8 9 7 - 9 0 2 . Rodin,J., Solomon, S., & Metcalf.J. ( 1 9 7 9 ) . Role of control in mediating perceptions of density.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 9 8 8 - 9 9 9 . Schulz, R. ( 1 9 7 6 ) . Effects of control and predictability on the psychological well-being of the in-

stitutionalized aged. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 5 6 3 - 5 7 3 .

EMOTION AND MOTIVATION

R e a d i n g 21 A S E X U A L M O T I V A T I O N

R e a d i n g 2 2 I C A N S E E I T ALL O V E R Y O U R F A C E !

R e a d i n g 2 3 L I F E , C H A N G E , A N D S T R E S S

R e a d i n g 2 4 T H O U G H T S O U T O F T U N E

This section deals with o u r inner e x p e r i e n c e s of emotion a n d motivation. Many nonpsychologists have trouble with the idea of researching these issues scien- tifically. A popular belief c o n t e n d s that o u r emotions a n d motivations just happen,

that we don't have m u c h control over them, a n d that they a r e part of o u r stan-

d a r d e q u i p m e n t from birth. However, psychologists have always been fascinated

with the issues of where your emotions c o m e from a n d how your feelings cause

you to act as you do. E m o t i o n a n d motivation a r e basic a n d powerful influences

on behavior, a n d a g r e a t deal of research allows us to understand t h e m better.

T h e first study in this section may surprise you in that it focuses on the

sexual r e s p o n s e studies b e g u n by t h e famous r e s e a r c h t e a m of Masters a n d

J o h n s o n in t h e 1 9 6 0 s . It is i n c l u d e d h e r e b e c a u s e h u m a n sexual feelings a n d

behaviors a r e strongly influenced by o u r e m o t i o n s , which can also serve as

powerful motivational forces. T h e s e c o n d r e a d i n g e x a m i n e s a f a m o u s a n d fas-

cinating study a b o u t facial expressions o f e m o t i o n s a n d d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t o u r

facial expressions for basic e m o t i o n s a r e t h e s a m e for e v e r y o n e in all cultures

t h r o u g h o u t t h e world. T h e third study in this section presents r e s e a r c h a b o u t

how extreme e m o t i o n s , t h o s e t h a t c r e a t e stress, c a n affect y o u r health. T h e

f o u r t h r e a d i n g allows you t o e x p e r i e n c e t h e p r o c e s s o f o n e o f t h e most, i f n o t

t h e most, f a m o u s e x p e r i m e n t s i n t h e a r e a o f motivation: t h e original d e m o n -

stration of a psychological event called cognitive dissonance.

Reading 21: A SEXUAL MOTIVATION . .. Masters, W. H., & Johnson, V. E. (1966). Human sexual response. Boston:

Little, Brown.

You may n o t immediately realize this, but h u m a n sexuality is very psychologi-

cal. Many p e o p l e m i g h t logically p l a c e t h e study of sexual behavior into t h e

disciplines of biology or physiology, a n d it is t r u e t h a t these sciences certainly

158

Reading 21 A Sexual Motivation . 159

c o n n e c t to t h e t o p i c in various ways a n d a r e t h e c e n t r a l focus of sexual behav-

i o r of m o s t animals. F o r h u m a n s , however, sexual activity is as m u c h a

psychological p r o c e s s . T h i n k a b o u t it: sexual a t t r a c t i o n , sexual desire, a n d sex-

ual functioning a r e all d e p e n d e n t in m a n y ways u p o n psychology. If y o u d o u b t

this, just c o n s i d e r a c o u p l e of obvious facts. You know t h a t m o s t p e o p l e en-

g a g e i n sexual b e h a v i o r for m a n y reasons o t h e r t h a n r e p r o d u c t i o n . T h o s e r e a -

sons a r e usually psychological. Also, as far as we know, h u m a n s a r e t h e only

species on E a r t h to suffer f r o m sexual p r o b l e m s such as hypoactive (low) sex-

ual desire, p r o b l e m s with o r g a s m , erectile dysfunction, p r e m a t u r e ejacula-

tion, vaginismus, a n d so o n . T h e s e p r o b l e m s often have psychological causes.

Having said that, however, you should be aware at t h e o u t s e t of this dis-

cussion that the full expression of ourselves as sexual beings, as well as t h e suc-

cessful t r e a t m e n t o f sexual p r o b l e m s , d e p e n d s o n a c l e a r a n d t h o r o u g h

u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f o u r sexual functioning: t h e physiology o f h u m a n sexual r e -

sponse. This is what Masters a n d J o h n s o n set o u t to study.

P r i o r t o t h e 1 9 6 0 s , t h e definitive works o n t h e sexual b e h a v i o r o f hu-

m a n s were t h e large-scale surveys of A m e r i c a n s ' sexual activities published by

Alfred Kinsey in t h e late 1 9 4 0 s a n d early 1 9 5 0 s . T h e f a m o u s Kinsey R e p o r t s ,

Sexual Behavior in the Human Male ( 1 9 4 8 ) a n d Sexual Behavior in the Human F e -

m a l e ( 1 9 5 3 ) , asked t h o u s a n d s o f m e n a n d w o m e n a b o u t t h e i r sexual b e h a v i o r

a n d attitudes, including topics r a n g i n g f r o m f r e q u e n c y o f i n t e r c o u r s e t o mas-

turbation habits t o h o m o s e x u a l e x p e r i e n c e s . W i t h t h e publication o f these r e -

ports, suddenly h u m a n s h a d a m e a s u r e against which to c o m p a r e t h e i r own

sexual lifestyles a n d m a k e relative j u d g m e n t s of t h e i r p e r s o n a l sexual behav-

iors. T h e Kinsey R e p o r t s offered a r a r e glimpse into t h e sexuality of h u m a n s ,

a n d t h e publications a r e still cited today as a s o u r c e of statistical i n f o r m a t i o n

a b o u t sexual behavior. T h e i m p o r t a n c e of Kinsey's work notwithstanding, his

r e s e a r c h only provided i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t what p e o p l e say they do sexually. A

c o n s p i c u o u s g a p r e m a i n e d in o u r knowledge a b o u t what h a p p e n s to us physi-

cally when we e n g a g e in sexual behavior a n d what p e o p l e should to do if they

a r e e x p e r i e n c i n g s o m e kind o f sexual p r o b l e m .

E n t e r Masters a n d J o h n s o n . T h e s e a r e n a m e s that have b e c o m e synony-

m o u s with h u m a n sexuality r e s e a r c h a n d a r e r e c o g n i z e d by millions t h r o u g h o u t

the world. As the 1 9 6 0 s began, the U n i t e d States was l a u n c h e d into what has

now b e c o m e known as the "sexual revolution." T h e sweeping social c h a n g e s

that were taking place provided an opportunity for o p e n a n d frank scientific ex-

ploration of o u r sexuality that would n o t have b e e n possible previously. Until

the 1 9 6 0 s , lingering Victorian messages that sexual behavior is something secre-

tive, hidden, a n d certainly n o t a topic of discussion, m u c h less study, p r e c l u d e d

virtually all support, social a n d financial, for Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s project. B u t

as m e n a n d w o m e n began to acknowledge m o r e openly the fact that we a r e sex-

ual beings, with sexual feelings a n d desires, t h e social climate b e c a m e o n e that

was ready n o t only to a c c e p t the r e s e a r c h of Masters a n d J o h n s o n b u t to de-

m a n d it. Behavioral statistics were no l o n g e r e n o u g h . P e o p l e were ready to

learn a b o u t their physical responses to sexual stimulation.

160 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

It was within this social c o n t e x t t h a t Masters a n d J o h n s o n b e g a n to study

h u m a n sexual r e s p o n s e . T h e i r early work c u l m i n a t e d in t h e b o o k that is t h e

subject of this discussion. A l t h o u g h this work was c a r r i e d o u t m o r e than t h r e e

d e c a d e s a g o , i t c o n t i n u e s t o influence o u r knowledge o f t h e physiology o f sex-

ual r e s p o n s e .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

T h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t p r o p o s i t i o n i n Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s r e s e a r c h was that

to u n d e r s t a n d h u m a n sexuality we m u s t study actual sexual behaviors as they

o c c u r in r e s p o n s e to sexual stimulation, r a t h e r t h a n simply r e c o r d what peo-

ple p e r c e i v e o r believe t h e i r sexual e x p e r i e n c e s t o be.

T h e i r objective in p r o p o s i n g this t h e o r y was a t h e r a p e u t i c o n e : to help

p e o p l e o v e r c o m e sexual p r o b l e m s t h a t they m i g h t b e e x p e r i e n c i n g . Masters

a n d J o h n s o n e x p r e s s e d this g o a l as follows:

[The] fundamentals of human sexual behavior cannot be established until two questions are answered: What physical reactions develop as the human male and female respond to effective sexual stimulation? Why do men and women behave as they do when responding to effective sexual stimulation? If human sexual in- adequacy ever is to be treated successfully, the medical and behavioral profes- sions must provide answers to these basic questions, (p. 4)

C o m b i n e d with this objective, Masters a n d J o h n s o n also p r o p o s e d t h a t

t h e only m e t h o d by which such answers c o u l d be o b t a i n e d was d i r e c t system-

atic o b s e r v a t i o n a n d physiological m e a s u r e m e n t s o f m e n a n d w o m e n i n all

stages o f sexual r e s p o n d i n g .

M E T H O D

Participants

As y o u m i g h t i m a g i n e , t h e first h u r d l e in a r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t such as this is ob-

taining participants. T h e p r o j e c t r e q u i r e d v o l u n t e e r s w h o would be willing to

e n g a g e in sexual acts in a l a b o r a t o r y setting while being closely o b s e r v e d a n d

m o n i t o r e d . Obviously, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s w e r e c o n c e r n e d that such a require-

m e n t m i g h t c r e a t e t h e impossibility o f f i n d i n g p a r t i c i p a n t s w h o would r e p r e -

sent t h e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n . A n o t h e r c o n c e r n was that t h e strange a n d

artificial e n v i r o n m e n t o f t h e r e s e a r c h lab m i g h t c a u s e participants who did

v o l u n t e e r for t h e study to be u n a b l e to r e s p o n d in their usual ways.

D u r i n g t h e early phases o f t h e i r study, Masters a n d J o h n s o n e m p l o y e d

prostitutes as p a r t i c i p a n t s . T h i s decision was based on t h e i r assumption that

individuals f r o m m o r e a v e r a g e a n d typical lifestyles would refuse to partici-

p a t e . Prostitutes w e r e studied extensively for nearly 2 years: 8 females a n d 3

males. T h e r e s e a r c h e r s d e s c r i b e d t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s o f these f i r s t 1 1 partici-

pants a s being c r u c i a l t o t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e m e t h o d s a n d r e s e a r c h tech-

niques used t h r o u g h o u t t h e e n t i r e study.

T h e s e participants, however, did n o t constitute a n a p p r o p r i a t e g r o u p o n

which to base an extensive study of h u m a n sexual r e s p o n s e . This was b e c a u s e

Reading 21 A Sexual Motivation . . . 161

TABLE 21-1 Distribution of Participants by Age, Gender, and Educational Level

NUMBER NUMBER HIGH GRADUATE AGE OF MALES OF FEMALES SCHOOL COLLEGE SCHOOL

18-20 2 0 2 0 0 21-30 182 120 86 132 84 31-40 137 111 72 98 78 41-50 27 42 18 29 22 51-60 23 19 15 1 5 12 61-70 8 14 7 11 4 71-80 3 4 3 3 1 81-90 0 2 0 2 0

Totals 382 312 203 290 201

(Adapted from pp. 13-15.)

their lifestyle a n d sexual e x p e r i e n c e s did n o t even r e m o t e l y r e p r e s e n t t h e

population at large. T h e r e f o r e , t h e r e s e a r c h e r s knew that any findings based

on this p a r t i c i p a n t g r o u p c o u l d n o t be credibly applied to p e o p l e in g e n e r a l .

It was necessary, t h e r e f o r e , to obtain a m o r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a m p l e of partici-

pants. C o n t r a r y to their e a r l i e r a s s u m p t i o n , t h e r e s e a r c h e r s did n o t find this

as difficult as they h a d a n t i c i p a t e d .

T h r o u g h t h e i r c o n t a c t s i n t h e a c a d e m i c , m e d i c a l , a n d t h e r a p e u t i c c o m -

munities in a large m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a , Masters a n d J o h n s o n w e r e able to enlist

a l a r g e g r o u p of v o l u n t e e r s f r o m a wide r a n g e of s o c i o e c o n o m i c a n d e d u c a -

tional b a c k g r o u n d s . T h e a g e , g e n d e r , a n d e d u c a t i o n a l d e m o g r a p h i c s o f t h e

participants who were eventually c h o s e n a r e s u m m a r i z e d in Table 2 1 - 1 . All

volunteers w e r e carefully interviewed to d e t e r m i n e t h e i r r e a s o n s for partici-

pating a n d t h e i r ability to c o m m u n i c a t e on issues of sexual responsiveness.

T h e prospective participants also a g r e e d to a physical e x a m to e n s u r e a n a t o m -

ical normalcy.

Procedures

To study in detail t h e physiological responses of t h e h u m a n body d u r i n g sex-

ual activity a n d stimulation, a wide variety of m e t h o d s of m e a s u r e m e n t a n d

observation w e r e necessary. T h e s e i n c l u d e d such s t a n d a r d m e a s u r e s o f physi-

ological r e s p o n s e as pulse, b l o o d p r e s s u r e , a n d r a t e of respiration. In addi-

tion, specific sexual responses were t o b e o b s e r v e d a n d r e c o r d e d . F o r this, t h e

"sexual activity of study subjects i n c l u d e d , at various times, m a n u a l a n d m e -

c h a n i c a l m a n i p u l a t i o n , n a t u r a l coition [ i n t e r c o u r s e ] with t h e female p a r t n e r

in supine, superior, or knee-chest position, a n d , for m a n y female study sub-

j e c t s , artificial coition in t h e supine or knee-chest positions" ( p . 2 1 ) . W h a t all

that m e a n s is t h a t s o m e t i m e s participants were o b s e r v e d a n d m e a s u r e d while

having i n t e r c o u r s e in various positions, a n d o t h e r times they were o b s e r v e d

a n d m e a s u r e d d u r i n g m a s t u r b a t i o n e i t h e r manually o r with m e c h a n i c a l de-

vices specially designed to allow for c l e a r r e c o r d i n g of r e s p o n s e .

162 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

T h e s e special devices, d e s i g n e d by physicists, were, basically, c l e a r plastic

artificial penises t h a t allowed for i n t e r n a l observations without distortion.

T h e s e c o u l d be adjusted in size for t h e w o m a n ' s c o m f o r t a n d were c o n t r o l l e d

c o m p l e t e l y by t h e w o m a n for d e p t h a n d r a t e of m o v e m e n t in t h e vagina

t h r o u g h o u t t h e r e s p o n s e cycle.

P A R T I C I P A N T O R I E N T A T I O N A N D C O M F O R T

You c a n i m a g i n e that all these e x p e c t a t i o n s , observations, a n d devices m i g h t

c r e a t e s o m e real e m o t i o n a l difficulties for t h e participants, a n d Masters a n d

J o h n s o n w e r e acutely aware o f these potential difficulties. T o h e l p place par-

ticipants at ease with t h e study's p r o c e d u r e s , they e n s u r e d t h e following:

Sexual activity was first encouraged in privacy in the research quarters and then continued with the investigative team present until the study subjects were quite at ease in their artificial surroundings. No attempt was made to record reactions . . . until the study subjects felt secure in their surroundings and confident of their ability to perform. . . . This period of training established a sense of secu- rity in the integrity of the research interest and in the absolute anonymity em- bodied in the program, (pp. 2 2 - 2 3 )

S o m e p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e involved in only o n e r e c o r d i n g session, while

o t h e r s p a r t i c i p a t e d actively for several years. F o r t h e r e s e a r c h i n c l u d e d in t h e

b o o k that i s t h e topic o f discussion h e r e , Masters a n d J o h n s o n estimated that

they w e r e able to study 1 0 , 0 0 0 c o m p l e t e sexual r e s p o n s e cycles with female ob-

servation o u t n u m b e r i n g m a l e o b s e r v a t i o n by a r a t i o of 3 to 1. In t h e i r words,

" a m i n i m u m o f 7 , 5 0 0 c o m p l e t e cycles o f sexual r e s p o n s e have b e e n e x p e r i -

e n c e d by female study participants c o o p e r a t i n g in various a s p e c t of t h e r e -

s e a r c h p r o g r a m , a s o p p o s e d t o a m i n i m u m total o f 2 , 5 0 0 m a l e o r g a s m i c

( e j a c u l a t o r y ) e x p e r i e n c e s " ( p . 1 5 ) .

R E S U L T S

Masters a n d J o h n s o n discovered a wealth of i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t h u m a n sexual

r e s p o n s e , a n d s o m e o f t h e i r f i n d i n g s a r e s u m m a r i z e d i n t h e pages a h e a d .

However, a n o t h e r a s p e c t of t h e i r r e s e a r c h to keep in m i n d is that m u c h of

what they f o u n d f r o m t h e i r s a m p l e o f participants i s t r u e o f m o s t people. O f

c o u r s e , s o m e e x c e p t i o n s exist, b u t in g e n e r a l , everyone's basic physiological

r e s p o n s e s to sexual stimulation a r e similar. You must r e m e m b e r , t h o u g h , as

you r e a d a b o u t t h e i r early findings, t h a t Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s r e s e a r c h did

not address sexual attitudes, e m o t i o n s , m o r a l s , values, p r e f e r e n c e s , orienta-

tions, or likes or dislikes. T h e s e m a t t e r s clearly a r e not similar for e v e r y o n e ,

a n d it is o u r individual variations in these issues that c r e a t e t h e vast a n d won-

d r o u s diversity t h a t exists in h u m a n sexuality. Let's look at s o m e of Masters

a n d J o h n s o n ' s m o s t influential f i n d i n g s .

T h e Sexual Response C y c l e

After studying a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 0 , 0 0 0 sexual events, Masters a n d J o h n s o n

f o u n d t h a t h u m a n sexual r e s p o n s e c o u l d be divided into four stages which,

Reading 21 A Sexual Motivation . . . 163

TABLE 21-2 Masters and Johnson's Stages of the Sexual Response Cycle

STAGE FEMALE RESPONSE SUMMARY MALE RESPONSE SUMMARY

Excitement First sign: vaginal lubrication. Clitoral glans becomes erect. Nipples become erect, breasts enlarge. Vagina increases in length, and inner two-thirds of vagina expands.

Plateau Outer one-third of vagina swells, reducing opening by up to 50%. Inner two-thirds of vagina continues to balloon or "tent." Clitoris retracts toward body and under hood. Lubrication decreases. Minor lips engorge with blood and darken in color, indicating orgasm is near. Muscle tension and blood pressure increase.

Orgasm Begins with rhythmic contractions in pelvic area at intervals of 0.8 second, especially in muscles behind the lower vaginal walls. Uterus contracts rhythmically as well. Muscle tension increased throughout body. Duration recorded from 7.4 seconds to 104.6 seconds. Length does not equal perceived intensity.

Resolution Clitoris, uterus, vagina, nipples, etc., return to unaroused state in less than 1 minute. Clitoris often remains very sensitive to touch for 5 to 10 minutes. This process may take several hours if woman has not experienced an orgasm.

First sign: erection of penis. Time to erection varies (with person, age, alcohol/drug use, fatigue, stress, etc.). Skin of scrotum pulls up toward body, testes rise. Erection may be lost if dis- tracted but usually regained readily. Full erection attained; not lost easily if distracted. Corona enlarges further. Cowper's gland secretes pre-ejaculate fluid. Testes elevate further, rotate, and enlarge, indicating orgasm is near. Muscle tension and blood pressure increase.

Begins with pelvic contractions 0.8 second apart. Ejaculation, the expelling of semen, occurs in two phases: (1) emission (semen builds up in urethral bulb, producing sensation of ejaculatory inevitability); (2) expulsion (genital muscles contract, forcing semen out through urethra).

Approximately 50% loss of erection within 1 minute; more gradual return to fully unaroused state. Testes reduce in size and descend. Scrotum relaxes.

they t e r m e d t h e human sexual response cycle. T h e s e stages a r e e x c i t e m e n t ,

plateau, o r g a s m , a n d resolution (Table 2 1 - 2 ) . A l t h o u g h they a c k n o w l e d g e in

their b o o k that the stages w e r e arbitrarily defined, these divisions m a d e t h e

discussion o f sexual r e s p o n s e easier a n d c l e a r e r . Today, h u m a n sexual r e -

sponse is rarely discussed in a c a d e m i c or professional settings without refer-

e n c e to these four stages.

Sexual Anatomy

O n e of the g r e a t contributions m a d e by Masters a n d J o h n s o n in their r e s e a r c h

on sexual response was the dispelling of sexual myths. And o n e a r e a of wide-

spread misunderstanding that t h e r e s e a r c h e r s a t t e m p t e d to c o r r e c t relates to

sexual anatomy—specifically, the penis a n d t h e vagina. T h r o u g h o u t history, o n e

of the most c o m m o n sexual c o n c e r n s expressed by m e n has related to penis

size. Masters a n d J o h n s o n studied a lot of penises a n d could finally shed s o m e

164 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

scientific light on these c o n c e r n s . T h e y called t h e m "phallic fallacies." T h e two

worries m e n have expressed a r e ( a ) l a r g e r penises a r e m o r e effective in provid-

ing satisfying sexual stimulation for t h e w o m a n a n d (b) their own penis is t o o

small. Masters a n d J o h n s o n d e m o n s t r a t e d that both c o n c e r n s a r e misguided by

revealing actual average penis sizes found in their r e s e a r c h a n d explaining the

functioning of t h e penis a n d vagina during h e t e r o s e x u a l intercourse.

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s found that the n o r m a l r a n g e for flaccid penile length in

this study population was between 2 . 8 inches a n d 4 . 3 inches, with an average

length of a b o u t 3 inches. F o r e r e c t penises the average length r a n g e d from

a b o u t 5 . 5 inches to just u n d e r 7 inches, with an average of about 6 inches. T h e s e

n u m b e r s were significantly smaller than the c o m m o n l y held beliefs about what

constitutes a large versus a small penis. B u t what was even m o r e surprising was

that when they m e a s u r e d t h e size of e r e c t penises, the r e s e a r c h e r s found that a

l a r g e r flaccid penis does n o t p r e d i c t a l a r g e r e r e c t penis. In fact, they discovered

overall that smaller flaccid penises t e n d to enlarge m o r e u p o n sexual excite-

m e n t than do penises that a r e l a r g e r in their flaccid state. Looking at averages,

a flaccid penis of 3 inches increased to a length of 6 inches, but a 4-inch flaccid

penis only a d d e d a b o u t 2 . 5 inches to r e a c h a length of 6 . 5 inches. To further il-

lustrate this finding, Masters a n d J o h n s o n r e p o r t e d t h e largest a n d smallest ob-

served c h a n g e f r o m flaccid to e r e c t state. O n e m a l e participant was found to

have a flaccid penile length of 2 . 8 inches. T h e increase that was observed in this

participant u p o n e r e c t i o n was 3 . 3 inches, to an e r e c t length of 6.1 inches. An-

o t h e r participant who was m e a s u r e d flaccid at 4 inches increased only 2.1

inches, for an identical e r e c t length of 6.1 inches.

M o r e i m p o r t a n t than all these m e a s u r e m e n t s of penises is the notion that

a woman's sexual e n j o y m e n t a n d satisfaction d e p e n d on penis size. Masters

a n d J o h n s o n ' s r e s e a r c h , as e x p l a i n e d in a section titled "Vagina Fallacies"

found that i d e a to be totally without merit. In their careful observations using

t h e artificial penis t e c h n i q u e described earlier, they d e t e r m i n e d that the

vagina is an e x t r e m e l y elastic s t r u c t u r e c a p a b l e of a c c o m m o d a t i n g penises of

varying size. "Full a c c o m m o d a t i o n usually is a c c o m p l i s h e d with t h e first few

thrusts o f t h e penis regardless o f penile size" (p. 1 9 4 ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , they

f o u n d t h a t during t h e p l a t e a u stage of t h e r e s p o n s e cycle (see Table 2 1 - 2 ) , the

walls of t h e vaginal o p e n i n g swell to envelop a penis of virtually any size. T h e r e -

f o r e , as t h e a u t h o r s c o n c l u d e , "It b e c o m e s obvious that penile size usually is a

m i n o r f a c t o r i n sexual stimulation o f t h e female p a r t n e r " (p. 1 9 5 ) .

Female and Male Differences in Sexual Response

A l t h o u g h M a s t e r s a n d J o h n s o n d e m o n s t r a t e d m a n y similarities i n t h e sexual

r e s p o n s e cycles o f m e n a n d w o m e n , they also p o i n t e d o u t s o m e i m p o r t a n t

differences. T h e i r m o s t f a m o u s a n d m o s t r e v o l u t i o n a r y finding c o n c e r n e d

t h e o r g a s m a n d r e s o l u t i o n stages o f t h e cycle. Following o r g a s m , b o t h m e n

a n d w o m e n e n t e r t h e r e s o l u t i o n stage, w h e n s e x u a l tension d e c r e a s e s

rapidly a n d s e x u a l s t r u c t u r e s r e t u r n to t h e i r u n a r o u s e d states (this is also

k n o w n as detumescencé). M a s t e r s a n d J o h n s o n f o u n d t h a t d u r i n g this time, a

Reading 21 A Sexual Motivation . . . 165

m a n e x p e r i e n c e s a refractory period, d u r i n g w h i c h he is physically i n c a p a b l e

o f e x p e r i e n c i n g a n o t h e r o r g a s m r e g a r d l e s s o f t h e type o r a m o u n t o f stimu-

lation h e receives. T h i s r e f r a c t o r y p e r i o d m a y last f r o m several m i n u t e s t o

several h o u r s or even a day, a n d it t e n d s to l e n g t h e n as a m a n ages.

Masters a n d J o h n s o n f o u n d t h a t m a n y w o m e n d o n o t a p p e a r t o have a

r e f r a c t o r y p e r i o d a n d with c o n t i n u e d , effective stimulation a r e c a p a b l e o f ex-

p e r i e n c i n g o n e o r m o r e additional o r g a s m s following t h e first, a n e x p e r i e n c e

r e f e r r e d to as multiple orgasms. T h e r e s e a r c h e r s r e p o r t e d that w o m e n , unlike

m e n , a r e "capable of maintaining an o r g a s m i c e x p e r i e n c e for a relatively long

p e r i o d o f time" ( p . 1 3 1 ) .

W h i l e this m u l t i o r g a s m i c capacity was n o t news to m a n y w o m e n , it was

n o t widely known. P r i o r to Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s work, it was c o m m o n l y be-

lieved that m e n h a d t h e g r e a t e r o r g a s m i c capabilities. Consequently, this find-

ing, as well as m a n y o t h e r s in Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s r e s e a r c h , h a d a

far-reaching i m p a c t o n cultural a n d societal attitudes a b o u t m a l e a n d female

sexuality. I t should b e n o t e d h e r e that a l t h o u g h m o s t w o m e n a r e physiologi-

cally c a p a b l e of multiple o r g a s m s , n o t all w o m e n seek or even desire t h e m . In-

d e e d , m a n y w o m e n have never e x p e r i e n c e d multiple o r g a s m s a n d a r e

completely satisfied with t h e i r sexual lives. Also, m a n y w o m e n w h o have h a d

multiple o r g a s m s find t h a t they also a r e usually satisfied with a single o r g a s m .

T h e i m p o r t a n t p o i n t is t h a t individuals vary g r e a d y in t e r m s of what is physi-

cally a n d emotionally satisfying sexually. Masters a n d J o h n s o n w e r e a t t e m p t -

ing to address t h e full r a n g e of physiological possibilities.

C R I T I C I S M S

Most of t h e criticisms of Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s early r e s e a r c h focus e i t h e r on

the arbitrary n a t u r e of their four stages of sexual response or on t h e fact that

they spent litde time discussing t h e cognitive a n d e m o t i o n a l aspects of sexuality.

However, Masters a n d J o h n s o n addressed these criticisms in their early writings.

As m e n t i o n e d previously, t h e a u t h o r s w e r e fully aware that t h e i r four

sexual r e s p o n s e phases were purely a r b i t r a r y b u t t h a t t h e divisions w e r e help-

ful in r e s e a r c h i n g a n d e x p l a i n i n g t h e c o m p l e x p r o c e s s of sexual r e s p o n s e in

h u m a n s . O t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s over t h e years have suggested different stage the-

ories. F o r e x a m p l e , H e l e n Singer Kaplan (Kaplan, 1 9 7 4 ) p r o p o s e d a t h r e e -

stage m o d e l t h a t includes desire, v a s o c o n g e s t i o n ( e n g o r g e m e n t o f t h e

genitals), a n d muscle c o n t r a c t i o n s ( o r g a s m ) . T h e s e stages reflect Kaplan's be-

lief t h a t an analysis of sexual r e s p o n s e should begin with sexual desire b e f o r e

any sexual stimulation begins, a n d she suggests t h a t n o distinction c a n o r

n e e d b e drawn between e x c i t e m e n t a n d p l a t e a u . H e r focus o n t h e desire as-

p e c t o f sexuality leads into t h e o t h e r main criticism o f Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s

original work: t h e lack of a t t e n t i o n to psychological factors.

Masters a n d J o h n s o n a c k n o w l e d g e d t h a t a n e x a m i n a t i o n o f psychologi-

cal a n d e m o t i o n a l factors was n o t t h e g o a l o f t h e p r o j e c t . T h e y did believe,

however, t h a t a c o m p l e t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e physiological side of sexual be-

havior was a n e c e s s a r y prerequisite for a satisfying a n d fulfilling s e x life. A n d

166 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

they d e m o n s t r a t e d this belief in subsequent books dealing with t h e psycho-

logical a n d e m o t i o n a l aspects o f o u r sexuality.

O v e r t h e 3 0 years since Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s first b o o k a p p e a r e d , s o m e

r e s e a r c h has q u e s t i o n e d s o m e of their findings as they apply to all h u m a n s .

F o r e x a m p l e , r e s e a r c h has d e m o n s t r a t e d that s o m e w o m e n may e x p e r i e n c e a

r e f r a c t o r y p e r i o d d u r i n g which time they a r e incapable o f e x p e r i e n c i n g addi-

tional o r g a s m s , a n d a small p e r c e n t a g e o f m e n may b e c a p a b l e o f multiple or-

gasms with little o r n o r e f r a c t o r y p e r i o d between t h e m . Also, a l t h o u g h

ejaculation was t h o u g h t t o b e entirely t h e d o m a i n o f m e n , r e c e n t r e s e a r c h

d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t s o m e w o m e n may, u n d e r s o m e c i r c u m s t a n c e s , ejaculate a t

o r g a s m (see Zaviacic, 2 0 0 2 , for a discussion of this r e s e a r c h ) .

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

It would be impossible to list h e r e even a representative sample of t h e n u m e r o u s

articles a n d books published e a c h year that refer substantively to Masters and

J o h n s o n ' s early work on h u m a n sexual response. T h e s e publications r a n g e from

basic c o r e texts in h u m a n sexuality (e.g., H o c k , 2 0 0 7 ; McAnulty & B u r n e t t e ,

2 0 0 4 ) to very specific, cutting-edge articles in psychology a n d sexuality journals.

In addition, as you m i g h t i m a g i n e , Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s m o d e l was

a n d c o n t i n u e s to g e n e r a t e controversy. Probably t h e m o s t lively d e b a t e today

revolves a r o u n d w h e t h e r their four-phase m o d e l c a n b e applied t o b o t h m e n

a n d w o m e n , a s t h e r e s e a r c h e r s suggested.

O n e study in this vein i n c o r p o r a t e d Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s pioneering

work in designing, administering, a n d analyzing responses to a national survey

of sexual satisfaction a m o n g nearly 1,000 w o m e n , ages 20 to 65 years, in hetero-

sexual relationships ( B a n c r o f t et al., 2 0 0 3 ) . T h e goal of the study was to e x a m -

ine w h e t h e r women's sexual p r o b l e m s may be viewed as similar to men's sexual

p r o b l e m s a n d to what e x t e n t p h a r m a c o l o g i c a l t r e a t m e n t s might be helpful for

w o m e n , in the way that erectile disorder drugs (Viagra, Levitra, Cialis) have

h e l p e d m a n y m e n . T h e study found that p r o b l e m s with t h e physical side of sex-

ual response (arousal, vaginal lubrication, o r g a s m ) were not strongly related to

sexual distress a m o n g t h e respondents: "The overall picture is that lack of e m o -

tional well-being a n d negative e m o t i o n a l feelings during sexual interaction with

t h e p a r t n e r a r e m o r e i m p o r t a n t d e t e r m i n a n t s o f sexual distress than impair-

m e n t o f t h e m o r e physiological aspects o f female sexual response. Although w e

do n o t have directly c o m p a r a b l e d a t a for m e n , we c a n predict that t h e p a t t e r n

would be different, with g r e a t e r i m p o r t a n c e attr ~hed to genital response" (Ban-

croft e t al., 2 0 0 3 , p . 2 0 2 ) . I n o t h e r words, women's most c o m m o n sexual prob-

lems may be far t o o c o m p l e x to be solved with just a "littíe pink pill."

Indeed, in 2 0 0 0 , a new a p p r o a c h to understanding female sexual problems

was developed by a collaborative g r o u p of 12 women scientists, researchers, a n d

clinicians who a r g u e d that, sexually, m e n a n d women a r e m o r e different than

they a r e similar a n d that Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s four-phase m o d e l is invalid in de-

scribing, explaining, or treating sexual problems in women (see Tiefer, 2 0 0 1 ) .

This "new view of women's sexual problems" contends that "women's accounts do

Reading 21 A Sexual Motivation . . . 167

n o t f i t neatly i n t o t h e Masters a n d J o h n s o n m o d e l ; for e x a m p l e , w o m e n gen-

erally do n o t s e p a r a t e 'desire' f r o m 'arousal,' [ a n d ] w o m e n c a r e less a b o u t

physical than [ a b o u t ] subjective arousal" (Tiefer, 2 0 0 1 , p . 9 3 ) . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s

p r o p o s e that Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s m o d e l which, for t h e m o s t p a r t , e q u a t e s

m a l e a n d female sexual resp onse, fails to take i n t o a c c o u n t s o m e i m p o r t a n t

factors t h a t a r e n e c e s s a r y t o u n d e r s t a n d w o m e n ' s sexual p r o b l e m s . T h e s e in-

c l u d e t h e c o n t e x t of t h e relationship in which t h e sexual r e s p o n d i n g is o c c u r -

ring a n d individual differences a m o n g w o m e n in t h e i r sexual r e s p o n s e

p a t t e r n s . M o r e specifically, they suggest t h a t w o m e n ' s sexual difficulties re-

quire a classification system that takes i n t o a c c o u n t cultural, political, a n d e c o -

n o m i c factors (e.g., lack of sexuality e d u c a t i o n or access to c o n t r a c e p t i o n ) ; a

woman's p a r t n e r a n d issues in t h e relationship (e.g., fear of abuse, i m b a l a n c e

of power, overall d i s c o r d ) ; psychological factors (e.g., past sexual t r a u m a , de-

pression, a n x i e t y ) ; a n d m e d i c a l factors (e.g., h o r m o n a l imbalances, sexually

transmitted infections, m e d i c a t i o n side effects).

T h a n k s i n large p a r t t o t h e work o f Masters a n d J o h n s o n , o u r u n d e r -

standing of t h e physical processes involved in h u m a n sexual p l e a s u r e a n d r e -

sponse is quite a d v a n c e d c o m p a r e d to a half c e n t u r y a g o , but we still have a

g r e a t deal to learn. Undoubtedly, with Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s g r o u n d b r e a k i n g

studies as a b a c k d r o p , r e s e a r c h will c o n t i n u e a n d o u r insights into h u m a n sex-

ual r e s p o n s e will e x p a n d .

C O N C L U S I O N S

I n 1 9 7 1 , Masters a n d J o h n s o n w e r e m a r r i e d . O v e r t h e following two d e c a d e s ,

they c o n t i n u e d to work a n d publish as a t e a m . In 1 9 9 2 , d u e to i n c r e a s i n g dif-

f e r e n c e s between t h e m a b o u t t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e i r r e s e a r c h a n d r e t i r e m e n t ,

the c o u p l e divorced a n d J o h n s o n went into r e t i r e m e n t . Masters c o n t i n u e d a s

d i r e c t o r of t h e Masters a n d J o h n s o n Institute in St. L o u i s until his r e t i r e m e n t

i n 1 9 9 4 . H e died f r o m c o m p l i c a t i o n s o f Parkinson's disease o n F e b r u a r y 1 6 ,

2 0 0 1 , a t t h e a g e o f 8 5 .

You'll recall f r o m t h e b eginni n g of this discussion t h a t t h e m a i n goal of

Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s r e s e a r c h was t o address p r o b l e m s o f sexual inade-

q u a c y — t o help p e o p l e solve their sexual p r o b l e m s . A l m o s t without question

they have d o n e that. Virtually all sex therapy, w h e t h e r for erectile p r o b l e m s ,

o r g a s m difficulties, r a p i d ejaculation, inhibited arousal issues, or any o t h e r

sexual p r o b l e m rests on a basic f o u n d a t i o n of Masters a n d J o h n s o n ' s r e s e a r c h .

It is impossible to overestimate t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n s of Masters a n d J o h n s o n in

o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g a n d study o f h u m a n sexuality. A n e x a m i n a t i o n o f any r e -

c e n t sexuality t e x t b o o k will reveal m o r e citations for a n d m o r e s p a c e d e v o t e d

t o t h e work o f Masters a n d J o h n s o n t h a n t o any o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s . B u t b e y o n d

this, William Masters a n d Virginia J o h n s o n , o v e r t h e d e c a d e s following t h e

publication of Human Sexual Response (which f o r m s t h e basis of this r e a d i n g ) ,

c o n t i n u e d r e s e a r c h i n g a n d applying t h e i r findings to help p e o p l e attain sex-

ual fulfillment. F o u r years after t h e publication Human Sexual Response, they

released Human Sexual Inadequacy ( 1 9 7 0 ) , which applied t h e i r e a r l i e r r e s e a r c h

168 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

directly t o solutions for sexual p r o b l e m s . T h e i r c o n t i n u o u s a t t e n t i o n t o t h e i r

c h o s e n field is d e m o n s t r a t e d by a list of t h e i r subsequent books:

The Pleasure Bond ( 1 9 7 0 ) ; Homosexuality in Perspective ( 1 9 7 9 ) ; Human Sexuality ( 1 9 9 5 ) ; Crisis: Hetero- sexual Behavior in the Age of AIDS ( 1 9 8 8 ) ; Masters and Johnson cm Sex and Human Loving ( 1 9 8 6 ) ; and Heterosexuality ( 1 9 9 8 ) .

Bancroft, J . , Loftus, J . , & Long, J. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Distress about sex: A national survey of women in het- erosexual relationships. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 32, 1 9 3 - 2 0 8 .

Hock, R. R. ( 2 0 0 7 ) . Human sexuality. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Kaplan, H. S. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . The new sex therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel. Kinsey, A., Pomeroy, W., Martin, C, & Gebhard, P. ( 1 9 4 8 ) . Sexual behavior in the human male.

Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders. Kinsey, A., Pomeroy, W., Martin, C, & Gebhard, P. ( 1 9 5 3 ) . Sexual behavior in the human female.

Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders. McAnulty, R. D., & Burnette, M. M. ( 2 0 0 4 ) Exploring human sexuality: Making healthy decisions, 2nd

ed. Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon. Tiefer, L. ( 2 0 0 1 ) . A new view of women's sexual problems: Why new? Why now? Journal of Sex

Research, 38, 8 9 - 9 6 . Zaviacic, Milan ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Female urethral expulsions evoked by local digital stimulation of the

G-spot: Differences in the response patterns. Journal of Sex Research, 24, 3 1 1 - 1 8 .

Reading 22: I CAN S E E IT ALL OVER YOUR FACE! Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1971). Constants across cultures in the face and emo-

tion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17,124-129.

T h i n k of s o m e t h i n g funny. W h a t is t h e expression on y o u r face? Now think of

s o m e t h i n g in y o u r past t h a t m a d e you sad. Did your face c h a n g e ? C h a n c e s a r e

it did. Undoubtedly, you a r e aware that c e r t a i n facial expressions c o i n c i d e with

specific e m o t i o n s . A n d , m o s t of t h e time, you c a n probably tell how people a r e

feeling emotionally f r o m t h e expressions on t h e i r faces. Now, c o n s i d e r this:

C o u l d you be equally successful in d e t e r m i n i n g s o m e o n e ' s e m o t i o n a l state

based on facial expression if that p e r s o n is f r o m a different culture—say, Ro-

m a n i a , S u m a t r a , or Mongolia? In o t h e r words, do you believe facial expressions

of e m o t i o n a r e universal? Most p e o p l e believe that they a r e , until they stop a n d

c o n s i d e r how radically different o t h e r cultures a r e f r o m their own. T h i n k of

t h e multitude of cultural differences in styles of dress, gestures, personal space,

rules of etiquette, religious beliefs, attitudes, a n d so o n . W i t h all these differ-

e n c e s influencing behavior, it would be r a t h e r amazing if any h u m a n c h a r a c -

teristics, including e m o t i o n a l expressions, were identical across all cultures.

Paul E k m a n i s c o n s i d e r e d t h e leading r e - " a r c h e r i n t h e a r e a o f t h e facial

e x p r e s s i o n of e m o t i o n . T h i s article details his early r e s e a r c h , which was de-

signed to d e m o n s t r a t e t h e universality of these expressions. A l t h o u g h t h e au-

t h o r s a c k n o w l e d g e d in t h e i r i n t r o d u c t i o n t h a t previous r e s e a r c h e r s h a d

f o u n d s o m e e v i d e n c e t h a t facial behaviors a r e d e t e r m i n e d by culturally vari-

able learning, they a r g u e d t h a t previous studies w e r e p o o r l y d o n e a n d , in re-

ality, expressions for basic e m o t i o n s a r e equivalent in all cultures.

Several years p r i o r to this study, E k m a n a n d Friesen h a d c o n d u c t e d r e -

s e a r c h in which they showed p h o t o g r a p h s of faces to college-educated people

Reading 22 I Can See It all over Your Face! 169

in A r g e n t í n a , Brazil, Chile, J a p a n , a n d t h e U n i t e d States. All t h e participants

from every c o u n t r y c o r r e c d y identified the s a m e facial expressions as c o r r e -

sponding to t h e s a m e e m o t i o n s regardless of t h e nationality of t h e p e r s o n in

the p h o t o . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s p r e s e n t e d their findings a s evidence o f t h e univer-

sality of e m o t i o n a l expressions. However, as E k m a n a n d Friesen themselves

pointed out, these findings were o p e n to criticism b e c a u s e m e m b e r s of t h e cul-

tures studied h a d all b e e n e x p o s e d to i n t e r n a t i o n a l mass m e d i a (movies, mag-

azines, television), which a r e full of facial expressions that m i g h t have b e e n

transmitted to all these countries. W h a t was n e e d e d to prove t h e universality of

e m o t i o n a l expression was to study a c u l t u r e t h a t h a d n o t b e e n e x p o s e d to any

of these influences. I m a g i n e how difficult ( p e r h a p s impossible) it would be to

find such a c u l t u r e given today's mass m e d i a . Well, even in 1 9 7 1 it wasn't easy.

E k m a n a n d Friesen traveled t o t h e s o u t h e a s t highlands o f New G u i n e a

to find participants for their study a m o n g t h e F o r e p e o p l e w h o still existed as

a n isolated S t o n e Age society. Many o f t h e m e m b e r s o f this g r o u p h a d e x p e r i -

e n c e d litüe o r n o c o n t a c t with m o d e r n c u l t u r e s . T h e r e f o r e , they h a d n o t b e e n

e x p o s e d t o e m o t i o n a l facial expressions o t h e r than those o f t h e i r own p e o p l e .

T H E O R E T I C A L P R O P O S I T I O N S

T h e t h e o r y underlying E k m a n a n d Friesen's study was that specific facial e x -

pressions c o r r e s p o n d i n g t o basic e m o t i o n s a r e universal. E k m a n a n d Friesen

stated it quite simply:

The purpose of this paper was to test the hypothesis that members of a preliter- ate culture who had been selected to ensure maximum visual isolation from lit- erate cultures will identify the same emotion concepts with the same faces as do members of literate Western and Eastern cultures, (p. 125)

M E T H O D

T h e m o s t isolated s u b g r o u p o f t h e F o r e w e r e t h o s e r e f e r r e d t o a s t h e S o u t h

F o r e . T h e individuals selected t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e study h a d seen n o movies,

did n o t speak English or Pidgin, h a d n e v e r worked for a W e s t e r n e r , a n d h a d

never lived in any of t h e W e s t e r n s e t d e m e n t s in t h e a r e a . A total of 1 8 9 adults

a n d 1 3 0 c h i l d r e n w e r e c h o s e n t o p a r t i c i p a t e , o u t o f a total S o u t h F o r e p o p u -

lation o f a b o u t 1 1 0 0 0 . F o r c o m p a r i s o n , 2 3 adults w e r e c h o s e n who h a d e x p e -

r i e n c e d a g r e a t deal of c o n t a c t with W e s t e r n society t h r o u g h watching movies,

living in t h e settlements, a n d a t t e n d i n g missionary schools.

T h r o u g h trial a n d e r r o r , t h e r e s e a r c h e r s found t h a t t h e m o s t effective

m e t h o d of asking t h e participants to identify e m o t i o n s was to p r e s e n t t h e m

with t h r e e p h o t o g r a p h s of different facial e x p r e s s i o n s a n d to r e a d a b r i e f de-

scription o f a n e m o t i o n - p r o d u c i n g s c e n e o r story that c o r r e s p o n d e d t o o n e o f

t h e p h o t o g r a p h s . T h e p a r t i c i p a n t c o u l d t h e n simply p o i n t t o t h e e x p r e s s i o n

that best m a t c h e d t h e story. T h e stories u s e d w e r e selected very carefully to be

sure that e a c h s c e n e was r e l a t e d to only o n e e m o t i o n a n d t h a t it was r e c o g n i z -

able to t h e F o r e p e o p l e . Table 22-1 lists t h e six stories d e v e l o p e d by E k m a n

170 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

EMOTION STORY

6. Fear

1. Happiness

2. Sadness

3. Anger

4. Surprise

5. Disgust

His (her) friends have come and he (she) is happy.

His (her) child (mother) has died and he (she) feels very sad.

He (she) is angry and about to fight.

He (she) is just now looking at something new and unexpected.

He (she) is looking at something he (she) dislikes; or he (she) is look- ing at something that smells bad.

He (she) is sitting in his (her) house all alone and there is no one else in the village. There is no knife, ax, or bow and arrow in the house. A wild pig is standing in the door of the house and the man (woman) is looking at the pig and is very afraid of it. The pig has been standing in the doorway for a few minutes, and the person is looking at it very afraid, and the pig won't move away from the door, and he (she) is afraid the pig will bite him (her).

(Adapted from p. 126.)

a n d F r i e s e n . T h e a u t h o r s e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e fear story h a d t o b e l o n g e r t o pre-

v e n t t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s f r o m confusing it with surprise or anger.

A total o f 4 0 p h o t o g r a p h s o f 2 4 different p e o p l e , including m e n ,

w o m e n , boys, a n d girls, were used as e x a m p l e s of t h e six e m o t i o n a l e x p r e s -

sions. T h e s e p h o t o g r a p h s h a d b e e n validated previously by showing t h e m to

m e m b e r s o f various o t h e r cultures. E a c h p h o t o g r a p h h a d b e e n j u d g e d b y a t

least 7 0 % of o b s e r v e r s in at least two literate W e s t e r n or E a s t e r n cultures to

r e p r e s e n t t h e e m o t i o n being e x p r e s s e d .

T h e a c t u a l e x p e r i m e n t was c o n d u c t e d b y t e a m s consisting o f o n e m e m -

b e r o f t h e r e s e a r c h g r o u p a n d o n e m e m b e r o f t h e South F o r e tribe, who ex-

plained t h e task a n d translated t h e stories. E a c h adult p a r t i c i p a n t was shown 3

p h o t o g r a p h s ( 1 c o r r e c t a n d 2 i n c o r r e c t ) , told t h e story that c o r r e s p o n d e d t o

o n e o f t h e m , a n d asked t o c h o o s e t h e expression that best m a t c h e d t h e story.

T h e p r o c e d u r e was t h e s a m e for t h e c h i l d r e n , e x c e p t t h a t they only h a d t o

c h o o s e between 2 p h o t o g r a p h s , 1 c o r r e c t a n d 1 i n c o r r e c t . E a c h p a r t i c i p a n t

was p r e s e n t e d with various sets of p h o t o g r a p h s so that no single p h o t o g r a p h

ever a p p e a r e d twice in t h e c o m p a r i s o n .

T h e translators received careful training to ensure that they would n o t in-

fluence t h e participants. T h e y were told that i._ responses were absolutely right

or wrong a n d were asked n o t to p r o m p t the participants. Also, they were taught

how to translate the stories e x a c d y t h e same way e a c h time a n d to resist the temp-

tation to elaborate a n d embellish them. To avoid unintentional bias, the Western

m e m b e r of t h e r e s e a r c h team avoided looking at the participant a n d simply

r e c o r d e d the answers given.

R e m e m b e r t h a t these w e r e p h o t o g r a p h s o f expressions o f e m o t i o n s o n

t h e faces o f W e s t e r n e r s . C o u l d t h e F o r e p e o p l e c o r r e c d y identify t h e e m o t i o n s

in t h e p h o t o g r a p h s , even t h o u g h they n e v e r h a d seen a W e s t e r n face before?

TABLE 2 2 - 1 Ekman and Friesen's Stories Corresponding to Six Emotions

Reading 22 I Can See It all over Your Face! 171

TABLE 22-2 Percent of Adults Correctly Identifying Emotional Expression in Photographs

EMOTION IN STORY

NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS

PERCENT CHOOSING CORRECT PHOTOGRAPH

Happiness 220 92.3 Anger 98 85.3 Sadness 191 79.0 Disgust 101 83.0 Surprise 62 68.0 Fear 184 80.5 Fear (with surprise) 153 42.7

(Adapted from p. 12'/.)

R E S U L T S

First, analyses were c o n d u c t e d to d e t e r m i n e if any responses differed between

males a n d females o r between adults a n d c h i l d r e n . T h e adult w o m e n t e n d e d

to be m o r e hesitant to p a r t i c i p a t e a n d h a d e x p e r i e n c e d less c o n t a c t with West-

e r n e r s than t h e m e n had. However, no significant differences in ability to c o r -

rectly identify t h e e m o t i o n s in t h e p h o t o g r a p h s w e r e f o u n d a m o n g any of t h e

g r o u p s .

Tables Table 2 2 - 2 a n d Table 2 2 - 3 s u m m a r i z e t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f c o r r e c t

responses for t h e six e m o t i o n s by t h e least W e s t e r n i z e d adults a n d t h e chil-

d r e n , respectively. N o t all participants w e r e e x p o s e d to all e m o t i o n s , a n d

s o m e t i m e s participants were e x p o s e d t o t h e s a m e e m o t i o n m o r e t h a n o n c e .

T h e r e f o r e , t h e n u m b e r o f participants i n t h e tables d o e s n o t equal t h e overall

total n u m b e r of participants. All t h e differences w e r e statistically significant

e x c e p t when participants w e r e asked to distinguish fear f r o m surprise. In this

situation, m a n y e r r o r s w e r e m a d e , a n d , for o n e g r o u p , surprise was actually se-

lected 6 7 % o f the time when t h e story d e s c r i b e d fear.

T h e r e s e a r c h e r s also c o m p a r e d t h e W e s t e r n i z e d a n d n o n - W e s t e r n i z e d

adults. No significant differences between these two g r o u p s were f o u n d on

TABLE 22-3 Percent of Children Correctly Identifying Emotional Expressions in Photographs

EMOTION IN STORY

NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS

PERCENT CHOOSING CORRECT PHOTOGRAPH

Happiness 135 92.8 Anger 69 85.3 Sadness 145 81.5 Disgust 46 86.5 Surprise 47 98.3 Fear 64 93.3

(Adapted from p. 127.)

172 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

t h e n u m b e r w h o c h o s e t h e c o r r e c t p h o t o g r a p h s . Also, n o differences were

f o u n d between y o u n g e r a n d o l d e r c h i l d r e n . As you can see in Table 2 2 - 3 , t h e

c h i l d r e n a p p e a r e d t o p e r f o r m b e t t e r t h a n t h e adults, but E k m a n a n d Friesen

a t t r i b u t e d this to t h e fact t h a t they h a d to c h o o s e between only 2 p h o t o g r a p h s

instead o f 3 .

Discussion E k m a n a n d Friesen did n o t hesitate to draw a confident c o n c l u -

sion f r o m t h e i r data: T h e results for b o t h adults a n d c h i l d r e n clearly s u p p o r t

o u r hypothesis that p a r t i c u l a r facial behaviors a r e universally associated with

p a r t i c u l a r e m o t i o n s " ( p . 1 2 8 ) . T h e y based t h e i r c o n c l u s i o n o n the fact that

t h e South F o r e g r o u p h a d n o o p p o r t u n i t y t o l e a r n anything a b o u t W e s t e r n ex-

pressions a n d , thus, h a d no way of identifying t h e m , unless t h e expressions

were universal.

As a way of d o u b l e - c h e c k i n g t h e i r findings, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s videotaped

m e m b e r s o f t h e isolated F o r e c u l t u r e p o r t r a y i n g t h e s a m e six facial e x p r e s -

sions. L a t e r , when these tapes were shown to c o l l e g e students in t h e U n i t e d

States, t h e students c o r r e c t l y identified t h e expressions c o r r e s p o n d i n g to

e a c h o f t h e e m o t i o n s :

The evidence from both studies contradicts the view that all facial behavior asso- ciated with emotion is culture-specific, and that posed facial behavior is a unique set of culture-bound conventions not understandable to members of another culture, (p. 128)

T h e o n e e x c e p t i o n t o t h e i r consistent findings—that o f t h e confusion

p a r t i c i p a n t s s e e m e d to e x p e r i e n c e in distinguishing between expressions of

fear a n d s u r p r i s e — E k m a n a n d Friesen e x p l a i n e d by acknowledging certainly

s o m e cultural differences a r e seen in e m o t i o n a l e x p r e s s i o n , but this did n o t

d e t r a c t f r o m t h e p r e p o n d e r a n c e o f e v i d e n c e t h a t nearly all t h e o t h e r e x p r e s -

sions w e r e c o r r e c t l y i n t e r p r e t e d across t h e cultures. T h e y speculated that fear

a n d surprise may have b e e n c o n f u s e d "because in this c u l t u r e fearful events

a r e almost always also surprising; t h a t is, t h e sudden a p p e a r a n c e of a hostile

m e m b e r o f a n o t h e r village, t h e u n e x p e c t e d m e e t i n g o f a g h o s t o r s o r c e r e r ,

e t c . " ( p . 1 2 9 ) .

I M P L I C A T I O N S O F T H E R E S E A R C H

This study by E k m a n a n d Friesen served to d e m o n s t r a t e scientifically what you

already suspected: facial expressions of e m o t i o n s a r e universal. However, you

might still be asking yourself "What is fht significance of this information?"

Well, p a r t of t h e answer to that question relates to t h e n a t u r e - n u r t u r e debate

over w h e t h e r h u m a n behaviors a r e present at birth or a r e acquired t h r o u g h

learning. B e c a u s e facial expressions for t h e six e m o t i o n s used in this study ap-

p e a r to be influenced very little by cultural differences, it is possible to c o n c l u d e

that they must be innate, that is, biologically hard-wired in the brain at birth.

A n o t h e r r e a s o n b e h a v i o r a l scientists find t h e n o t i o n o f universal e m o -

tional e x p r e s s i o n s i n t e r e s t i n g is t h a t it a d d r e s s e s issues a b o u t how h u m a n s

evolved. In 1 8 7 2 , Darwin published his f a m o u s b o o k The Expression of Emotion

Reading 22 I Can See It all over Your Face! 173

R E C E N T A P P L I C A T I O N S

O t h e r m o r e r e c e n t studies i n various a r e a s o f r e s e a r c h have relied o n E k m a n ' s

early f i n d i n g s i n a t t e m p t i n g t o i m p r o v e o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f c h i l d r e n a n d

adults with d e v e l o p m e n t a l or l e a r n i n g disabilities. O n e such study f o u n d t h a t

c h i l d r e n d i a g n o s e d with autism (a pervasive d e v e l o p m e n t a l d i s o r d e r m a r k e d

by l a n g u a g e deficits, social withdrawal, a n d repetitive self-stimulation behav-

iors) a p p e a r to have difficulty r e c o g n i z i n g t h e facial e x p r e s s i o n s t h a t c o r r e -

spond to basic e m o t i o n s ( B o l t e & Poustka, 2 0 0 3 ) . This difficulty was even

in Man and Animals. He m a i n t a i n e d t h a t facial e x p r e s s i o n s w e r e adaptive

m e c h a n i s m s t h a t assisted a n i m a l s i n a d a p t i n g t o t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t , t h e r e b y

e n h a n c i n g t h e i r ability t o survive. T h e i d e a b e h i n d this was t h a t i f c e r t a i n

messages c o u l d b e c o m m u n i c a t e d within a n d a c r o s s species o f a n i m a l s

t h r o u g h facial e x p r e s s i o n s , t h e o d d s o f surviving a n d r e p r o d u c i n g would b e

i n c r e a s e d . F o r e x a m p l e , a n e x p r e s s i o n o f f e a r would p r o v i d e a silent w a r n -

ing o f i m m i n e n t d a n g e r f r o m p r e d a t o r s ; a n e x p r e s s i o n o f a n g e r w o u l d w a r n

less d o m i n a n t m e m b e r s o f t h e g r o u p t o stay away f r o m m o r e powerful o n e s ;

a n d a n e x p r e s s i o n o f disgust would c o m m u n i c a t e a m e s s a g e o f "Yuck! D o n ' t

e a t that, w h a t e v e r y o u d o " a n d p r e v e n t a p o t e n t i a l p o i s o n i n g . T h e s e e x p r e s -

sions, however, would d o t h e a n i m a l s n o g o o d i f they w e r e n o t universally

r e c o g n i z e d a m o n g all t h e individuals m a k i n g u p t h e species. E v e n t h o u g h

these e x p r e s s i o n s may now b e less i m p o r t a n t t o h u m a n s i n t e r m s o f t h e i r

survival value, t h e f a c t t h a t they a r e universal a m o n g u s w o u l d i n d i c a t e t h a t

they have b e e n passed o n t o u s genetically f r o m o u r e v o l u t i o n a r y a n c e s t o r s

a n d have assisted u s i n r e a c h i n g o u r p r e s e n t position o n t h e e v o l u t i o n a r y

ladder.

A fascinating study d e m o n s t r a t e d this leftover survival value of facial e x -

pressions i n h u m a n s . T h e r e s e a r c h e r s ( H a n s e n & H a n s e n , 1 9 8 8 ) r e a s o n e d

that i f facial expressions c o u l d w a r n o f i m p e n d i n g d a n g e r , t h e n h u m a n s

should be able to r e c o g n i z e c e r t a i n expressions, such as a n g e r , m o r e easily

than other, less t h r e a t e n i n g expressions. To test this, they p r e s e n t e d partici-

pants with p h o t o g r a p h s of l a r g e crowds of p e o p l e with different facial e x p r e s -

sions. In s o m e of t h e p h o t o g r a p h s , all t h e people's e x p r e s s i o n s w e r e h a p p y

e x c e p t for o n e that was angry. In o t h e r p h o t o g r a p h s , all t h e e x p r e s s i o n s w e r e

angry, e x c e p t for o n e that was happy. T h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' task was to pick o u t

t h e face that was different. T h e a m o u n t of time it t o o k t h e participants to find

a single happy face in a c r o w d of a n g r y faces was significandy l o n g e r t h a n

when they s e a r c h e d a crowd of happy faces for a single a n g r y face. F u r t h e r -

m o r e , as t h e size of t h e crowds in t h e p h o t o g r a p h s i n c r e a s e d , t h e time for p a r -

ticipants to find t h e happy face also i n c r e a s e d , but finding t h e a n g r y face did

n o t take significantly longer. This a n d o t h e r similar findings have i n d i c a t e d

that h u m a n s may b e biologically p r o g r a m m e d t o r e s p o n d t o t h e i n f o r m a t i o n

provided by c e r t a i n expressions b e t t e r t h a n o t h e r s b e c a u s e those expressions

offered m o r e survival i n f o r m a t i o n .

174 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

m o r e p r o n o u n c e d i n families with m o r e t h a n o n e autistic child a n d may help

e x p l a i n why m a n y autistic individuals show difficulty i n t e r p r e t i n g e m o t i o n a l

r e s p o n s e s f r o m o t h e r s .

T h e influence o f E k m a n ' s r e s e a r c h , however, i s n o t limited t o h u m a n s .

E k m a n ' s 1 9 7 1 study has b e e n c i t e d in r e s e a r c h on t h e e m o t i o n s of, believe it

or n o t , farm animals (Desire, Boissy, & Veissier, 2 0 0 2 ) . T h e s e r e s e a r c h e r s sug-

gest t h a t t h e welfare o f f a r m animals d e p e n d s , i n p a r t , o n their e m o t i o n a l r e -

a c t i o n s to t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t . W h e n individual animals feel in h a r m o n y with

t h e i r e n v i r o n m e n t , t h e i r welfare is m a x i m i z e d ; however, "any m a r k e d devia-

tion f r o m t h e state, if p e r c e i v e d by the individual, results in a welfare deficit

d u e t o negative e m o t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s " ( p . 1 6 5 ) .

A study citing E k m a n ' s 1 9 7 1 article a t t e m p t e d to shed light on exactly

how o n e , specific facial f e a t u r e — t h e eyebrows—contributes to facial r e c o g n i -

t i o n (Sadr, J a r u d i , & Sinha, 2 0 0 3 ) . Previous r e s e a r c h h a d c e n t e r e d m o r e o n

t h e eyes a n d m o u t h , but these r e s e a r c h e r s found t h a t t h e eyebrows may b e

m o r e i m p o r t a n t than t h e eyes themselves. T h e a u t h o r s c o n c l u d e d "that t h e

a b s e n c e of eyebrows in familiar faces leads to a very l a r g e a n d significant dis-

r u p t i o n in r e c o g n i t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e . In fact, a significantly g r e a t e r d e c r e m e n t

in face r e c o g n i t i o n is o b s e r v e d in t h e a b s e n c e of eyebrows t h a n in t h e a b s e n c e

o f eyes" ( p . 2 8 5 ) . So, i f you a r e ever i n n e e d o f a n effective disguise, b e sure t o

c o v e r y o u r eyebrows!

C O N C L U S I O N

O v e r t h e past t h r e e d e c a d e s following his early cross-cultural studies on e m o -

tional e x p r e s s i o n s , E k m a n has c o n t i n u e d his r e s e a r c h individually a n d in col-

l a b o r a t i o n with F r i e s e n a n d several o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s . Within this body of

work, m a n y fascinating discoveries have b e e n m a d e . O n e f u r t h e r e x a m p l e o f

E k m a n ' s r e s e a r c h involves what is called t h e facial feedback theory of e m o t i o n a l

expressions. T h e t h e o r y states that t h e expression o n y o u r face actually feeds

i n f o r m a t i o n b a c k to y o u r brain to assist you in i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e e m o t i o n you

a r e e x p e r i e n c i n g . E k m a n tested this i d e a by identifying t h e e x a c t facial mus-

cles involved in e a c h of t h e six basic e m o t i o n s . He t h e n i n s t r u c t e d partici-

pants to tense these muscles into expressions resembling t h e various

e m o t i o n s . W h e n they did this, E k m a n was able to m e a s u r e physiological r e -

sponses i n t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s t h a t c o r r e s p o n d e d t o t h e a p p r o p r i a t e e m o t i o n r e -

sulting f r o m t h e racial e x p r e s s i o n a l o n e , a n d n o t from t h e a c t u a l p r e s e n c e o f

t h e e m o t i o n itself ( E k m a n , L e v e n s e n , & F r i c - e n , 1 9 8 3 ) .

E k m a n has also e x t e n d e d his r e s e a r c h i n t o t h e a r e a o f d e c e p t i o n a n d

how t h e face a n d t h e body leak i n f o r m a t i o n t o o t h e r s a b o u t w h e t h e r s o m e -

o n e is telling t h e t r u t h . In g e n e r a l , his findings have i n d i c a t e d t h a t p e o p l e

a r e able to d e t e c t w h e n o t h e r s a r e lying at a slightly b e t t e r t h a n c h a n c e level

w h e n o b s e r v i n g j u s t t h e i r facial e x p r e s s i o n s . However, w h e n allowed to ob-

serve a n o t h e r ' s e n t i r e body, p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e m u c h m o r e successful i n de-

t e c t i n g lies, indicating t h a t t h e body may provide b e t t e r clues to c e r t a i n states

Reading 23 Life, Change, and Stress 175

o f m i n d t h a n t h e face a l o n e ( s e e E k m a n , 1 9 8 5 , for a c o m p l e t e discussion o f

this issue). Most r e c e n d y , E k m a n has disdlled his e x t e n s i v e r e s e a r c h in a

b o o k titled, Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces and Feelings to Improve Commu-

nication and Emotional Life, written to h e l p all of us apply his work on t h e

r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e m e a n i n g o f facial e x p r e s s i o n s t o i m p r o v i n g o u r c o m m u n i -

cation a n d i n t e r a c t i o n s with r o m a n t i c p a r t n e r s , c h i l d r e n , c o w o r k e r s a n d

even s t r a n g e r s ( E k m a n , 2 0 0 7 ) .

E k m a n a n d his associates have p r o v i d e d us with a l a r g e literature on t h e

nonverbal c o m m u n i c a t i o n provided b y facial e x p r e s s i o n s (see E k m a n , 2 0 0 3 ) .

A n d r e s e a r c h in this a r e a c o n t i n u e s . It is likely t h a t studies will c o n t i n u e as we

b e c o m e increasingly skilled at t h e p r o c e s s that was t h e tide of E k m a n a n d

Friesen's 1 9 7 5 book, Unmasking the Face.

Boite, S., & Poustka, F. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . The recognition of facial affect in autistic and schizophrenia sub- jects and their first-degree relatives. Psychological Mediane, 33, 9 0 7 - 9 1 5 .

Darwin, C. R. ( 1 8 7 2 ) . The expression of the emotions in man and animals. London: J o h n Murray. Desire, L., Boissy, A., & Veissier, I. ( 2 0 0 2 ) . Emotions in farm animals: A new approach to animal

welfare in applied ethology. Behavioural Processes, 60, 1 6 5 - 1 8 0 . Ekman, P. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Telling lies. New York: Norton. Ekman, P. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Emotions revealed: Recognizing faces and feelings to improve communication and emo-

tional life. New York: Times Books. Ekman, P. ( 2 0 0 7 ) . Emotions revealed: Recognizing faces and feelings to improve communication and emo-

tional life. New York: Henry Holt. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . Unmasking the face. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Ekman, P., Levensen, R., & Friesen, W. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . Autonomic nervous system activity distinguishes

between emotions. Science, 164, 8 6 - 8 8 . Hansen, C, & Hansen, R. ( 1 9 8 8 ) . Finding the face in the crowd: An anger superiority effect.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 9 1 7 - 9 2 4 . Sadr, J . , Jarudi, I., & Sinha, P. ( 2 0 0 3 ) The role of eyebrows in face recognition. Perception, 32,

2 8 5 - 2 9 3 .

Reading 23: LIFE, CHANGE, AND S T R E S S Holmes, T. H., & Rahe, R. H. (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal

of Psychosomatic Research, 11, 213-218.

E v e r y o n e knows a b o u t stress. F o r m o s t of you, m o s t of t h e time, stress is an un-

pleasant, negative e x p e r i e n c e . Stress is a v e r y g e n e r a l t e r m a n d n o t easy to de-

fine, but o n e way of looking at it is to think of stress as any e x t r e m e e m o t i o n a l

r e a c t i o n . In this sense, e x t r e m e fear, a n g e r , sadness, or even happiness c o u l d

p r o d u c e stress. T h i n k for a m o m e n t a b o u t t h e last time y o u w e r e e x p e r i e n c -

ing a heavy load of stress: t h e kind of stress t h a t lasts m o r e t h a n a few h o u r s or

even a few days. Maybe you m o v e d to a new city, h a d a legal p r o b l e m , w e r e

dealing with difficulties in a relationship, c h a n g e d j o b s , lost y o u r j o b , e x p e r i -

e n c e d t h e d e a t h o f s o m e o n e close t o you, were injured, o r h a d t o c o p e with

s o m e o t h e r m a j o r upheaval in y o u r life. You know this kind of stress—it g o e s

on for a while a n d you have to deal with it, for b e t t e r or worse, every day. W h a t

176 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

h a p p e n e d to you at these times? H o w well did you c o p e ? Did you find that

y o u r physical h e a l t h d e t e r i o r a t e d ?

T h e c o n n e c t i o n between stress a n d illness is t h e focus of this c h a p t e r

a n d this f a m o u s article b y T h o m a s H o l m e s a n d R i c h a r d R a h e . Take a m o m e n t

to answer this question: Do you believe in a c l e a r c o n n e c t i o n between stress

a n d illness? You probably answered with a r e s o u n d i n g "Yes!" B u t if this s a m e

question h a d b e e n p o s e d to p e o p l e 20 or 30 years a g o , only a few would have

believed t h a t such a n association existed. O v e r t h e past c o u p l e o f d e c a d e s , re-

s e a r c h e r s in psychology a n d m e d i c i n e t o g e t h e r have clearly established that

this c o n n e c t i o n d o e s i n d e e d exist, a n d they have worked to u n d e r s t a n d it a n d

h e l p p e o p l e with it. W i t h i n t h e behavioral sciences, those professionals who

a r e primarily c o n c e r n e d with t h e c o n n e c t i o n between psychology a n d health

a r e called health psychologists.

T h e j o u r n a l in which t h e article u n d e r discussion a p p e a r s deals with

psychosomatic research. Psychosomatic illnesses a r e health p r o b l e m s that a r e

c a u s e d primarily by psychological factors r a t h e r t h a n physical ones. Such ill-

nesses a r e real; f r o m a medical perspective, t h e discomfort, pain, a n d suffering

truly exist. A n d victims of psychosomatic p r o b l e m s should n o t be confused

with hypochondriacs, who suffer f r o m i m a g i n a r y or e x a g g e r a t e d illnesses.

H e a l t h psychologists have established t h a t when c h a n g e s o c c u r in peo-

ple's lives t h a t r e q u i r e t h e m to m a k e m a j o r i n t e r n a l , psychological adjust-

m e n t s , they t e n d to e x p e r i e n c e a h i g h e r i n c i d e n c e of physical illness. T h e

c h a n g e s t h a t have this effect a r e called life stress. T h e a m o u n t of life stress you

e x p e r i e n c e varies over time. You may have h a d times in y o u r past ( o r p r e s e n t )

w h e n m a n y c h a n g e s w e r e o c c u r r i n g , while at o t h e r times life was relatively sta-

ble. Life stress also varies greatly f r o m p e r s o n to p e r s o n . T h e overall n u m b e r

of c h a n g e s t h a t o c c u r in y o u r life is different f r o m t h e n u m b e r in s o m e o n e

else's. If I w e r e to ask you how m u c h life stress you have e x p e r i e n c e d over, say,

t h e past year, what would you say? A lot? N o t m u c h ? A m o d e r a t e a m o u n t ?

T h e s e kinds o f vague j u d g m e n t s a r e n o t o f m u c h use t o scientists who want t o

study t h e relationship between stress a n d illness. T h e r e f o r e , o n e o f the f i r s t

questions in this a r e a of r e s e a r c h that n e e d e d to be answered was this: H o w

c a n r e s e a r c h e r s m e a s u r e life stress?

Obviously, it would n o t be ethical for psychologists to bring p e o p l e into

a l a b o r a t o r y , e x p o s e t h e m to stressful events, a n d wait for t h e m to b e c o m e ill.

A n d even if we i g n o r e t h e ethical c o n s i d e r a t i o n s of such r e s e a r c h (which we

c a n n o t ) , it would n o t r e p r e s e n t how stresr works in real life. To tackle this

p r o b l e m , H o l m e s a n d R a h e developed a written scale to m e a s u r e life stress.

T h e y a c k n o w l e d g e d in t h e i r article that previous a t t e m p t s to e x a m i n e a per-

son's level of stress only s u c c e e d e d in d e t e r m i n e d t h e n u m b e r a n d types of

stressful events. T h e y p r o p o s e d to take this line of r e a s o n i n g o n e step f u r t h e r

a n d develop a way to m e a s u r e t h e size or m a g n i t u d e of t h e stress c a u s e d by

various life e x p e r i e n c e s . T h e i d e a b e h i n d this was t h a t if such a m e a s u r e could

be d e v e l o p e d , it would be possible to obtain people's life-stress scores a n d r e -

late t h e n to t h e i r health status.

Reading 23 Life, Change, and Stress 177

M E T H O D

F r o m t h e i r clinical e x p e r i e n c e s , H o l m e s a n d R a h e c o m p i l e d a list o f 4 3 life

events that p e o p l e c o m m o n l y feel a r e stressful, in that they r e q u i r e a p e r s o n

to m a k e psychological adjustments to a d a p t to t h e event. This list was t h e n

p r e s e n t e d t o nearly 4 0 0 participants, w h o were asked t o r a t e e a c h item o n t h e

list for t h e a m o u n t of stress they t h o u g h t would be p r o d u c e d by t h e c h a n g e .

T h e actual instructions given to t h e participants r e a d , in p a r t , as follows:

In scoring, use all of your experience in arriving at your answer. This means per- sonal experience where it applies as well as what you have learned to be the case for others. Some persons accommodate to change more readily than others; some persons adjust with particular ease or difficulty to only certain events. Therefore, strive to give your opinion of the average degree of adjustment nec- essary for each event rather than the extreme. . . . "Marriage" has been given an arbitrary value of 500. As you complete each of the remaining events, think to yourself, "Is this event indicative of more or less readjustment than marriage? Would the readjustment take longer or shorter to accomplish?" (p. 213)

Participants were t h e n i n s t r u c t e d to assign a p o i n t value to e a c h event relative

to t h e value of 5 0 0 given to m a r r i a g e . If they saw an event as r e q u i r i n g m o r e

r e a d j u s t m e n t than m a r r i a g e , t h e p o i n t value would be higher, a n d vice versa.

All t h e participants' ratings for e a c h item were a v e r a g e d a n d t h e n divided by

10 to arrive at a s c o r e for t h e individual items.

This was a study with a r a t h e r simple a n d straightforward m e t h o d . T h e

i m p o r t a n c e a n d value o f t h e r e s e a r c h lie i n t h e results a n d t h e applications o f

the m e a s u r i n g device, which H o l m e s a n d R a h e called t h e Social Readjustment

Rating Scale (SRRS).

R E S U L T S

Table 23-1 lists t h e H o l m e s a n d Rahe's 43 life events in o r d e r by r a n k , with t h e

average p o i n t value that p a r t i c i p a n t s assigned t o e a c h o n e . O f t h e items in-

c l u d e d on t h e list, you c a n see t h a t "death of a spouse" was r a t e d t h e m o s t

stressful, whereas "minor violations of t h e law" was r a t e d as t h e least stressful.

You might also n o t i c e that n o t all t h e items a r e what you m i g h t c o n s i d e r to be

negative. Events such as Christmas, m a r r i a g e , a n d , yes, even a v a c a t i o n , c a n be

stressful in t e r m s of H o l m e s a n d Rahe's definition of stress: n e e d for i n t e r n a l ,

psychological r e a d j u s t m e n t to t h e event.

To c h e c k for consistency in t h e ratings, t h e r e s e a r c h e r s divided t h e par-

ticipants into several subgroups a n d c o r r e l a t e d t h e i r ratings o f t h e items.

S o m e o f t h e subgroups they c o m p a r e d were m a l e versus female, single versus

m a r r i e d , c o l l e g e - e d u c a t e d versus no c o l l e g e , white versus black, y o u n g e r ver-

sus older, h i g h e r s o c i o e c o n o m i c versus lower s o c i o e c o n o m i c , religious versus

nonreligious, a n d s o on. F o r all t h e s u b g r o u p c o m p a r i s o n s , t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s

were very high, indicating a s t r o n g d e g r e e o f a g r e e m e n t a m o n g t h e diverse

participants. W h a t this m e a n t was t h a t H o l m e s a n d R a h e c o u l d a s s u m e with a

r e a s o n a b l e a m o u n t of c o n f i d e n c e that this scale c o u l d be applied to all p e o p l e

with an a p p r o x i m a t e l y equal d e g r e e of a c c u r a c y .

178 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

TABLE 23-1 The Social Readjustment Rating Scale

RANK LIFE EVENT MEAN VALUE

1 Death of spouse 100

2 Divorce 73 3 Marital separation 65

4 Jail term 63 5 Death of close family member 63

6 Personal injury or illness 53 7 Marriage 50

8 Fired at work 47 9 Marital reconciliation 45

10 Retirement 45 11 Change in health of family member 44

12 Pregnancy 40 13 Sex difficulties 39 14 Gain of new family member 39

15 Business readjustment 39

16 Change in financial state 38 17 Death of close friend 37 18 Change to different line of work 36

19 Change in number of arguments with spouse 35 20 Large mortgage 31 21 Foreclosure of mortgage or loan 30 22 Change in responsibilities at work 29 23 Son or daughter leaving home 29 24 Trouble with in-laws 29 25 Outstanding personal achievement 28

26 Wife begins or stops work 26 27 Begin or end school 26 28 Change in living conditions 25

29 Revision of personal habits 24 30 Trouble with boss 23 31 Change in work hours or conditions 20 32 Change in residence 20 33 Change in schools 20 34 Change in recreation 19 35 Change in church activities 19 36 Change in social activities 18 37 Small mortgage 17 38 Change in sleeping habits 16 39 Change in number of family get-togethers 15 40 Change in eating habits 15 41 Vacation 13 42 Christmas 12 43 Minor violations of the law 11

(Adapted from p. 216.)

Reading 23 Life, Change, and Stress 179

D I S C U S S I O N

H o l m e s a n d R a h e n o t e i n t h e i r d i s c u s s i o n t h a t a c l e a r , c o m m o n t h e m e c o u l d

b e a p p l i e d t o all t h e life e v e n t s l i s t e d o n t h e i r s c a l e . E v e r y t i m e o n e o f t h e s e

s t r e s s f u l e v e n t s o c c u r s i n s o m e o n e ' s l i f e , t h e y e x p l a i n e d , i t r e q u i r e s s o m e d e -

g r e e o f a d a p t a t i o n , p e r s o n a l a d j u s t m e n t , o r c o p i n g . T h e e m p h a s i s , " t h e y

w r o t e , "is o n c h a n g e f r o m t h e e x i s t i n g s t e a d y s t a t e a n d n o t o n p s y c h o l o g i c a l

m e a n i n g , e m o t i o n , o r s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y " ( p . 2 1 7 ) . T h i s e x p l a i n s w h y s o m e o f

t h e i t e m s m a y b e i n t e r p r e t e d a s p o s i t i v e b y s o m e a n d n e g a t i v e b y o t h e r s , b u t

e i t h e r way, i n t e r n a l a d j u s t m e n t i s r e q u i r e d a n d s t r e s s r e s u l t s .

R e m e m b e r , t h i s a r t i c l e e x p l a i n s t h e r e s e a r c h b e h i n d t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f

a m e t h o d f o r m e a s u r i n g life s t r e s s . I f y o u w a n t t o t r y i t y o u r s e l f , j u s t l o o k d o w n

t h e l i s t a n d c i r c l e t h e c h a n g e s t h a t h a v e o c c u r r e d i n y o u r life o v e r t h e p a s t 1 2

m o n t h s . E a c h c h a n g e h a s a c e r t a i n n u m b e r o f p o i n t s , life change units ( L C U s ) ,

a s s i g n e d t o it. C a l c u l a t e y o u r L C U t o t a l . T h i s g i v e s y o u a n e s t i m a t e o f y o u r

a m o u n t o f life s t r e s s . T a k e a m o m e n t n o w t o f i n d y o u r s c o r e . A f t e r y o u ' v e

d o n e t h i s , y o u will p r o b a b l y f e e l a s i f s o m e t h i n g i s m i s s i n g . W h a t ' s m i s s i n g i s

t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n y o u r s c o r e a n d y o u r h e a l t h , w h i c h i s e n t i r e l y w h y t h e

r e s e a r c h e r s d e v e l o p e d t h e s c a l e . T o a d d r e s s t h i s , H o l m e s a n d R a h e d i d n ' t s t o p

w i t h d e v e l o p i n g t h e S R R S b u t w e n t o n t o g e t h e r a n d s e p a r a t e l y t o e x a m i n e t h e

r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h e i r s c a l e a n d t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f i l l n e s s .

SUBSEQUENT RESEARCH

I n t h e l a t e 1 9 6 0 s , t h e S R R S b e g a n t o b e u s e d i n m a n y s t u d i e s a s a t o o l f o r e x -

a m i n i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n s t r e s s a n d i l l n e s s . T h e v a l u e o f t h e s c a l e

r e s t e d o n its a b i l i t y t o p r e d i c t i l l n e s s b a s e d o n p e o p l e ' s t o t a l L C U s c o r e s .

I n e a r l y s t u d i e s , s e v e r a l t h o u s a n d p e o p l e w e r e a s k e d t o fill o u t t h e S R R S

a n d t o r e p o r t t h e i r h i s t o r i e s o f i l l n e s s . F i g u r e 2 3 - 1 g r a p h i c a l l y i l l u s t r a t e s t h e

150-199 200-299 300 and above Number of LCUs accumulated in previous year

FIGURE 23-1 Relationship between life change units and illness.

180 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

o v e r a l l f i n d i n g s o f t h e s e s t u d i e s ( s e e H o l m e s & M a s u d a , 1 9 7 4 ) . I n a n o t h e r

s t u d y o f 2 , 5 0 0 n a v y p e r s o n n e l , L C U s f o r t h e p a s t 6 m o n t h s w e r e r e c o r d e d

u s i n g t h e S R R S , j u s t p r i o r t o s h i p b o a r d t o u r s o f d u t y . D u r i n g t h e 6 - m o n t h

t o u r , t h o s e w i t h f e w e r t h a n 1 0 0 L C U s r e p o r t e d a n a v e r a g e o f 1.4 i l l n e s s e s ,

t h o s e w i t h b e t w e e n 3 0 0 a n d 4 0 0 a v e r a g e d 1.9 i l l n e s s e s , a n d t h o s e w i t h b e -

t w e e n 5 0 0 a n d 6 0 0 s u f f e r e d 2 . 1 i l l n e s s e s ( R a h e , M a h a n , & A r t h u r , 1 9 7 0 ) .

T h e s e a n d o t h e r s t u d i e s o v e r t i m e h a v e g e n e r a l l y s u p p o r t e d H o l m e s a n d

R a h e ' s c o n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e S R R S c a n p r e d i c t i l l n e s s . T h e f i n d i n g s r e p o r t e d

h e r e will a l s o g i v e y o u a n i d e a o f w h a t y o u r s c o r e o n t h e s c a l e m e a n s .

T h i n k o f y o u r s c o r e ( e s p e c i a l l y i f i t ' s h i g h ) a s a n i m p o r t a n t i n d i c a t o r o f

h o w s t r e s s f u l y o u r life i s a n d w h a t i m p a c t y o u r s t r e s s l e v e l s c o u l d h a v e o n y o u r

h e a l t h . H o w e v e r , b e f o r e y o u b e c o m e t o o w o r r i e d , s e v e r a l m e a n i n g f u l c r i t i -

c i s m s o f t h e S R R S a n d i t s a b i l i t y t o p r e d i c t i l l n e s s n e e d t o b e d i s c u s s e d .

CRITICISMS

S i n c e H o l m e s a n d R a h e d e v e l o p e d t h e i r S R R S , m a n y r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e e x -

p r e s s e d s e r i o u s c o n c e r n s a b o u t i t s a c c u r a c y a n d u s e f u l n e s s ( s e e T a y l o r , 2 0 0 2 ,

f o r a r e v i e w o f t h e s e c r i t i c i s m s ) . O n e o f t h e m o s t w i d e l y e x p r e s s e d c r i t i c i s m s

r e g a r d s t h e i n c l u s i o n o f b o t h p o s i t i v e a n d n e g a t i v e life e v e n t s i n t h e s a m e

s c a l e , a s w e l l a s e v e n t s t h a t a r e b o t h i n y o u r c o n t r o l ( e v e n t s o f c h o i c e , s u c h a s

m a r r i a g e ) a n d e v e n t s o v e r w h i c h y o u h a v e n o c o n t r o l ( s u c h a s t h e d e a t h o f a

f r i e n d ) . R e s e a r c h h a s d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t c e r t a i n e v e n t s s u c h a s t h o s e t h a t a r e

s u d d e n , n e g a t i v e , a n d o u t o f y o u r c o n t r o l a r e m o r e p r e d i c t i v e o f i l l n e s s t h a n

a r e p o s i t i v e , c o n t r o l l a b l e life c h a n g e s .

O t h e r s h a v e m a i n t a i n e d t h a t t h e s c a l e i s f l a w e d i n t h a t i t d o e s n o t t a k e

i n t o a c c o u n t y o u r interpretation o f a p a r t i c u l a r e v e n t . F o r e x a m p l e , r e t i r e m e n t

f o r o n e p e r s o n m a y m e a n a n e n d o f a c a r e e r , b e i n g " f o r c e d o u t t o p a s t u r e , "

w h i l e t o a n o t h e r i t i s s e e n a s a n e s c a p e f r o m d r u d g e r y i n t o f r e e d o m . O n e r e -

s e a r c h e r h a s s u g g e s t e d t h a t a m o r e a c c u r a t e s c a l e w o u l d b e o n e t h a t a l l o w s a

p e r s o n t o c h e c k a n e v e n t a n d a l s o r a t e i t o n s o m e m e a s u r e o f s e v e r i t y . C o h e n ,

K a m a r c k , a n d M e r m e l s t e i n , d e v e l o p e d a s c a l e d e s i g n e d t o d o t h i s : t h e

Perceived Stress Scale ( 1 9 8 3 ) .

I n a d d i t i o n , t h e w a y t h e r e s e a r c h h a s r e l a t e d t h e S R R S t o i l l n e s s h a s

b e e n q u e s t i o n e d . W h e n c a r e f u l l y a n a l y z e d s t a t i s t i c a l l y , t h e p r e d i c t i v e r e l a t i o n -

s h i p b e t w e e n y o u r L C U s c o r e a n d i l l n e s s i s i m p o r t a n t , y e t i t i s r a t h e r w e a k . I n

f a c t , S S R I s c o r e s a c c o u n t f o r o n l y a b o u t l O ? ' o f t h e t o t a l v a r i a t i o n a m o n g p e o -

p l e w h o b e c o m e ill. I n o t h e r w o r d s , i f y o u e x a m i n e 1 , 0 0 0 p e o p l e t o s e e w h o

b e c o m e s s i c k o v e r a 6 - m o n t h p e r i o d , y o u will f i n d g r e a t v a r i a t i o n i n t h e i n d i -

v i d u a l f a c t o r s l e a d i n g t o t h e i r i l l n e s s o r l a c k o f i l l n e s s . I f y o u h a v e t h e m all

c o m p l e t e a n S R R S , y o u will f i n d t h a t , c o n s i d e r i n g all t h e p o s s i b l e r e a s o n s f o r

h e a l t h v a r i a t i o n , t h e i r L C U s c o r e s e x p l a i n a b o u t 1 0 % o f it. T h i s is, n e v e r t h e -

l e s s , a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t c o r r e l a t i o n t h a t c o n f i r m s t h e a b i l i t y o f t h e S R R S

t o p r e d i c t i l l n e s s . H o w e v e r , i t a l s o says t h a t m a n y other f a c t o r s a r e i n v o l v e d i n

i l l n e s s . A n o t h e r w a y t o l o o k a t i t i s i f y o u k n o w s o m e o n e ' s L C U s c o r e , y o u r

Reading 23 Life, Change, and Stress 181

c h a n c e s o f p r e d i c t i n g t h e f u t u r e o f t h a t p e r s o n ' s h e a l t h s t a t u s a r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y

b e t t e r t h a n i f y o u d i d not h a v e t h e i r s c o r e .

Y o u m i g h t w o n d e r w h y , i f t h e S R R S h a s b e e n s o s e v e r e l y c r i t i c i z e d , h o w

c a n i t b e i m p o r t a n t e n o u g h t o i n c l u d e i n t h i s b o o k . T h a t ' s a g o o d q u e s t i o n .

R e m e m b e r , s o m e o f t h e b r e a k t h r o u g h s i n t h e h i s t o r y o f p s y c h o l o g y w e r e s u b -

s e q u e n t l y f o u n d t o b e l a c k i n g i n s o m e way, b u t t h a t d o e s n ' t d i m i n i s h t h e i m -

p a c t t h e y h a d o n o u r v i e w o f h u m a n b e h a v i o r . T h i s w o r k o f H o l m e s a n d R a h e ,

t h e S R R S , i n spite o / i t s l i m i t a t i o n s , c o n t i n u e s t o h o l d i t s p l a c e a s a p o p u l a r

s t r e s s - r e s e a r c h t o o l , 4 0 y e a r s a f t e r i t s i n c e p t i o n .

RECENT APPLICATIONS

A l t h o u g h o t h e r t o o l s f o r m e a s u r i n g s t r e s s h a v e b e e n , a n d a r e b e i n g , d e v e l -

o p e d , t h e S R R S i s still c h o s e n f r e q u e n t l y b y r e s e a r c h e r s . A s p r o o f o f t h e s c a l e ' s

o n g o i n g p o p u l a r i t y , a n a v e r a g e o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 0 0 s t u d i e s p e r y e a r c i t e

H o l m e s a n d R a h e ' s s c a l e . T h i s m a k e s i t o n e o f t h e m o s t o f t e n c i t e d s t u d i e s i n

t h i s b o o k . I t i s i m p o s s i b l e t o d i s c u s s h e r e e v e n a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a m p l i n g o f

t h e s e s t u d i e s , s o b r i e f m e n t i o n will b e m a d e o f s e v e r a l r e c e n t a r t i c l e s t o c o n v e y

t h e w i d e v a r i e t y o f r e s e a r c h a r e a s still m a k i n g u s e o f t h e S R R S .

O n e s t u d y i n c o r p o r a t i n g t h e S R R S e x a m i n e d t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n

life e v e n t s a n d f e e l i n g s o f h o p e l e s s n e s s ( H a a t a i n e n e t a l . , 2 0 0 3 ) . T h e r e -

s e a r c h e r s f o l l o w e d a d u l t s a m o n g t h e g e n e r a l p o p u l a t i o n ( w i t h o u t a n y d i a g -

n o s e d m e n t a l i l l n e s s ) o v e r 2 y e a r s . O f t h o s e who were not f e e l i n g h o p e l e s s a t t h e

b e g i n n i n g o f t h e 2 y e a r s , a l o n g w i t h 5 6 % o f t h o s e who were e x p e r i e n c i n g h o p e -

l e s s n e s s a t t h e b e g i n n i n g o f t h e 2 y e a r s , 4 % r e p o r t e d h o p e l e s s n e s s a t t h e e n d

o f t h e 2 - y e a r p e r i o d . T h e life e v e n t s m o s t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r e i t h e r c o n t i n u i n g o r

d e v e l o p i n g h o p e l e s s n e s s w e r e w o r s e n i n g o f a p a r t i c i p a n t ' s f i n a n c i a l s i t u a t i o n

a n d i n t e r p e r s o n a l c o n f l i c t s a t w o r k . H o w e v e r , t h e a u t h o r s p o i n t o u t t h a t p o s i -

tive c h a n g e s i n t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s ' l i v i n g s i t u a t i o n s a p p e a r e d t o protect t h e m

f r o m b e c o m i n g h o p e l e s s . ( F o r m o r e o n t h i s t o p i c s e e R e a d i n g 3 1 o n S e l i g -

m a n ' s s t u d y o f l e a r n e d h e l p l e s s n e s s . ) ) .

A s t u d y c o m p a r i n g a l c o h o l i c s w i t h n o n a l c o h o l i c s a d a p t e d H o l m e s a n d

R a h e ' s s c a l e t o e x a m i n e t h e l i n k b e t w e e n s t r e s s a n d a l c o h o l a b u s e ( F o u -

q u e r e a u e t a l . , 2 0 0 3 ) . T h e p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e a s k e d t o c o n t e m p l a t e i m a g i n e d

s c e n a r i o s i n v o l v i n g t w o l i f e - c h a n g e e v e n t s v e r s u s a s t r e s s f u l s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n . A l -

c o h o l i c s a n d n o n a l c o h o l i c s r a t e d t h e s c e n a r i o s a s e q u a l l y s t r e s s f u l , b u t t h e y

r a t e d t h e u r g e t o d r i n k a l c o h o l i n r e s p o n s e t o t h e s i t u a t i o n s v e r y d i f f e r e n t l y .

' T h e n o n a l c o h o l i c s r e p o r t e d l i t t l e s t i m u l u s t o d r i n k f r o m a n y c o m b i n a t i o n o f

i t e m s , w h e r e a s t h e a l c o h o l i c s n o t o n l y p e r c e i v e d t h e i n d i v i d u a l i t e m s a s s t i m u -

l a t i n g a n u r g e t o d r i n k , b u t a l s o u s e d t h e s a m e c o g n i t i v e r u l e i n j u d g i n g t h e

c o m b i n e d u r g e t o d r i n k a s t h e y u s e d i n j u d g i n g t h e c o m b i n e d s t r e s s " ( p . 6 6 9 ) .

T h e a u t h o r s s u g g e s t t h a t t h e s e f i n d i n g s m a y b e i m p o r t a n t i n h e l p i n g r e c o v e r -

i n g a l c o h o l i c s t o f i n d w a y s o f r e d u c i n g s t r e s s i n t h e i r l i v e s a n d u s i n g s t r a t e g i e s

o t h e r t h a n d r i n k i n g f o r c o p i n g w i t h s t r e s s f u l life e v e n t s .

A n i m p o r t a n t c r o s s - c u l t u r a l s t u d y q u e s t i o n e d t h e v a l i d i t y o f a p p l y i n g W e s t -

e r n d e f i n i t i o n s a n d t h e o r i e s a b o u t s t r e s s t o n o n - W e s t e r n c u l t u r e s ( L a u n g a n i ,

182 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

1 9 9 6 ) . U s i n g I n d i a a s a n e x a m p l e , t h e a u t h o r f o u n d t h a t e v e n t h e w o r d stress it­ s e l f d o e s n o t t r a n s l a t e w e l l i n t o o t h e r l a n g u a g e s . H e f u r t h e r c o n t e n d e d t h a t try­ i n g t o o v e r l a y W e s t e r n c o n c e p t u a l i z a t i o n s o f s t r e s s , s u c h a s t h o s e t a p p e d b y t h e S R R S , o n t o o t h e r c u l t u r e s , m a y n o t p r o v i d e a n a c c u r a t e p i c t u r e o f t h e n a t u r e a n d e x p e r i e n c e o f s t r e s s f o r m u c h o f t h e w o r l d ' s p o p u l a t i o n . F o r e x a m p l e , p e o ­ p l e i n collectivist c u l t u r e s , s u c h a s I n d i a , C h i n a , o r I s r a e l , w h e r e t h e w e l f a r e o f t h e l a r g e r s o c i a l g r o u p t a k e s p r e c e d e n c e o v e r t h e w e l f a r e o f a s i n g l e p e r s o n , m a y e x ­ p e r i e n c e l e s s life s t r e s s d i f f e r e n t l y o r m a y p e r c e i v e e n t i r e l y d i f f e r e n t life e v e n t s a s s t r e s s f u l c o m p a r e d t o W e s t e r n " i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c " c u l t u r e s , s u c h a s t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , w h e r e t h e S R R S w a s d e v e l o p e d ( f o r a m o r e c o m p l e t e d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e s e c u l t u r a l v a r i a t i o n s , s e e R e a d i n g 2 8 o n T r i a n d i s ' s w o r k ) .

O t h e r a p p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e S R R S i n t h e s t u d y o f h u m a n b e h a v i o r i n c l u d e , b u t a r e n o t l i m i t e d t o , c i g a r e t t e s m o k i n g , i m m u n e r e s p o n s e , p o s t t r a u m a t i c s t r e s s d i s o r d e r , p o l i c e o f f i c e r b u r n o u t , c h i l d a b u s e , b r e a s t c a n c e r , d i a b e t e s , m e d i c a l s c h o o l s u c c e s s , c h r o n i c i l l n e s s e s , e f f e c t s o f w a r o n s p o u s e s a n d c h i l ­ d r e n o f d e p l o y e d s o l d i e r s , H I V i n f e c t i o n a n d A I D S , t h e p s y c h o l o g i c a l e f f e c t s o f n a t u r a l d i s a s t e r s , d i v o r c e , a n d t h e a g i n g p r o c e s s .

C O N C L U S I O N

T h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n s t r e s s a n d i l l n e s s , a l t h o u g h r e a l , i s c o m p l e x a n d n o t a s i m p l e m a t t e r t o s t u d y . R a h e h i m s e l f h a s s u g g e s t e d t h a t i n a d d i t i o n t o a s i m ­ p l e L C U s c o r e , t h e f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s m u s t b e c o n s i d e r e d t o p r e d i c t p s y c h o s o ­ m a t i c i l l n e s s :

1 . H o w m u c h e x p e r i e n c e y o u h a v e h a d i n t h e p a s t w i t h s t r e s s f u l e v e n t s

2 . Y o u r c o p i n g s k i l l s ; t h a t is, y o u r a b i l i t y t o p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y d e f e n d y o u r s e l f i n t i m e s o f life s t r e s s

3 . T h e s t r e n g t h o f y o u r p h y s i o l o g i c a l s y s t e m s ( s u c h a s y o u r i m m u n e sys­ t e m ) t o d e f e n d y o u a g a i n s t t h e life s t r e s s t h a t y o u a r e u n a b l e t o c o p e w i t h p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y

4 . H o w y o u d e a l w i t h i l l n e s s w h e n i t d o e s o c c u r ( s u c h a s p r a c t i c i n g r e c u ­ p e r a t i v e b e h a v i o r s a n d s e e k i n g m e d i c a l h e l p )

P s y c h o l o g y a n d m e d i c i n e p r o f e s s i o n a l s , w o r k i n g t o g e t h e r , h a v e r e c o g ­ n i z e d t h a t v i r t u a l l y a l l i l l n e s s e s c o n t a i n a p s y c h o l o g i c a l c o m p o n e n t i n h o w t h e y d e v e l o p , h o w t h e y a r e t r e a t e d , a n d h o w p e o p l e r e c o v e r . C l e a r l y , t h e p r e ­ v e n t i o n a n d s u c c e s s f u l t r e a t m e n t o f i l l n e s - . n u s t i n v o l v e t h e e n t i r e p e r s o n : m i n d a n d b o d y .

C o h e n S., Kamarck X, & M e r m e l s t e i n R. ( 1 9 8 3 ) . A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 24, 3 8 5 - 3 9 6 .

F o u q u e r e a u , E., Fernandez, A., Mullet, E., & Sorum, P. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Stress a n d the urge to drink. Addictive Behaviors, 28, 6 6 9 - 6 8 5 .

H a a t a i n e n , K., Tanskanen, A., Kylmâ J., Antikainen, R., H o n k a l a m p i , K., Koivumaa-Honkanen, H., Viinamăki, H., & Hintikka, J. ( 2 0 0 3 ) . Life events are i m p o r t a n t in the course of h o p e ­ l e s s n e s s — a 2-year follow-up study in a general population. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 38, 4 3 6 - 4 4 1 .

Reading 24 Thoughts out of Tune 183

H o l m e s , T. H., & Masuda, M. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . Life c h a n g e a n d illness susceptibility. In B. S. D o h r e n w e n d & B. P. D o h r e n w e n d (Eds.), Stressful life events: Their nature and effects. N e w York: Wiley.

Laungani, P. ( 1 9 9 6 ) . Cross-cultural investigations of stress: C o n c e p t u a l a n d m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n - siderations. InternationalJournal of Stress Management, 3(1), 2 5 - 3 5 .

Rahe, R. H., Mahan, J., & Arthur, R. ( 1 9 7 0 ) . Prediction of near-future health c h a n g e from sub- j e c t s ' p r e c e d i n g life c h a n g e s . Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 14, 4 0 1 - 4 0 6 .

Taylor, S. ( 2 0 0 5 ) . Health psychology, 6th e d . N e w York: McGraw-Hill.

Reading 24: THOUGHTS OUT OF TUNE Festinger, L, & Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compli-

ance. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 58, 2 0 3 - 2 1 0 .

H a v e y o u e v e r b e e n i n a p o s i t i o n o f h a v i n g t o d o o r say s o m e t h i n g t h a t w a s

c o n t r a r y t o y o u r a t t i t u d e s o r p r i v a t e o p i n i o n s ? C h a n c e s a r e y o u h a v e ; e v e r y -

o n e h a s a t s o m e t i m e . W h e n y o u b e h a v e d t h a t way, w h a t h a p p e n e d t o y o u r a t -

t i t u d e o r o p i n i o n ? N o t h i n g ? W e l l , m a y b e n o t h i n g . H o w e v e r , s t u d i e s h a v e

s h o w n t h a t i n s o m e c a s e s , w h e n y o u r b e h a v i o r i s c o n t r a r y t o y o u r a t t i t u d e ,

y o u r a t t i t u d e will c h a n g e t o b r i n g i t i n t o a l i g n m e n t w i t h y o u r b e h a v i o r . F o r e x -

a m p l e , i f a p e r s o n i s f o r c e d (say, b y t h e d e m a n d s o f a n e x p e r i m e n t ) t o d e l i v e r

a s p e e c h i n s u p p o r t o f a v i e w p o i n t o r p o s i t i o n o p p o s e d t o h i s o r h e r p e r s o n a l

o p i n i o n , t h e s p e a k e r ' s a t t i t u d e s will s h i f t t o w a r d t h o s e g i v e n i n t h e s p e e c h .

I n t h e e a r l y 1 9 5 0 s , v a r i o u s s t u d i e s t r i e d t o e x p l a i n t h i s o p i n i o n s h i f t a s a

r e s u l t o f ( a ) m e n t a l l y r e h e a r s i n g t h e s p e e c h a n d ( b ) t h e p r o c e s s o f t r y i n g t o

t h i n k o f a r g u m e n t s i n f a v o r o f t h e f o r c e d p o s i t i o n . I n p e r f o r m i n g t h o s e m e n -

t a l t a s k s , t h e e a r l y t h e o r i e s a r g u e d , p a r t i c i p a n t s c o n v i n c e d t h e m s e l v e s o f t h e

p o s i t i o n t h e y w e r e a b o u t t o t a k e . I n p u r s u i n g t h i s l i n e o f r e a s o n i n g f u r t h e r ,

a d d i t i o n a l s t u d i e s w e r e c o n d u c t e d t h a t o f f e r e d m o n e t a r y r e w a r d s t o p a r t i c i -

p a n t s f o r g i v i n g c o n v i n c i n g s p e e c h e s c o n t r a r y t o t h e i r o w n v i e w s . I t w a s e x -

p e c t e d t h a t t h e g r e a t e r t h e r e w a r d , t h e g r e a t e r w o u l d b e t h e r e s u l t i n g o p i n i o n

c h a n g e i n t h e s p e a k e r . S e e m s l o g i c a l , d o e s n ' t it? H o w e v e r , a s o n e o f m a n y e x -

a m p l e s o f h o w c o m m o n s e n s e i s a p o o r p r e d i c t o r o f h u m a n b e h a v i o r , j u s t t h e

o p p o s i t e w a s f o u n d t o b e t r u e . L a r g e r r e w a r d s p r o d u c e d less a t t i t u d e c h a n g e

t h a n s m a l l e r r e w a r d s . B a s e d o n b e h a v i o r a l t h e o r i e s o f p s y c h o l o g y t h a t w e r e

p o p u l a r a t t h e t i m e - ( e . g . , o p e r a n t c o n d i t i o n i n g , r e i n f o r c e m e n t t h e o r y , e t c . ) ,

s u c h f i n d i n g s w e r e d i f f i c u l t f o r r e s e a r c h e r s t o e x p l a i n .

A f e w y e a r s l a t e r , L e o n F e s t i n g e r ( 1 9 1 9 - 1 9 8 9 ) , a r e s e a r c h p s y c h o l o g i s t a t

S t a n f o r d U n i v e r s i t y , p r o p o s e d t h e h i g h l y i n f l u e n t i a l a n d n o w f a m o u s t h e o r y o f

cognitive dissonance, w h i c h c o u l d a c c o u n t f o r t h e s e s e e m i n g l y d i s c r e p a n t f i n d -

i n g s . T h e w o r d cognitive r e f e r s t o m e n t a l p r o c e s s e s , s u c h a s t h o u g h t s , i d e a s , a t -

t i t u d e s , o r b e l i e f s ; t h e w o r d dissonance s i m p l y m e a n s " o u t o f t u n e . " T h e r e f o r e ,

F e s t i n g e r s u g g e s t e d , y o u will e x p e r i e n c e c o g n i t i v e d i s s o n a n c e w h e n y o u s i m u l -

t a n e o u s l y h o l d t w o o r m o r e c o g n i t i o n s t h a t a r e p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y i n c o n s i s t e n t .

W h e n t h i s c o n d i t i o n e x i s t s , i t c r e a t e s d i s c o m f o r t a n d s t r e s s t o v a r y i n g d e g r e e s ,

d e p e n d i n g o n t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f t h e d i s s o n a n c e t o y o u r life. T h i s d i s c o m f o r t

t h e n m o t i v a t e s y o u t o c h a n g e s o m e t h i n g t o r e d u c e t h e d i s s o n a n c e . B e c a u s e

184 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

y o u c a n n o t c h a n g e y o u r b e h a v i o r ( b e c a u s e y o u h a v e a l r e a d y d o n e it, o r b e -

c a u s e t h e s i t u a t i o n a l p r e s s u r e s a r e t o o g r e a t ) , y o u c h a n g e y o u r a t t i t u d e s .

F e s t i n g e r ' s t h e o r y g r e w o u t o f a n h i s t o r i c a l e v e n t i n v o l v i n g r u m o r s t h a t

s p r e a d t h r o u g h o u t I n d i a f o l l o w i n g a 1 9 3 4 e a r t h q u a k e t h e r e . I n t h e a r e a s o u t -

s i d e t h e d i s a s t e r z o n e , t h e r u m o r s p r e d i c t e d t h a t p e o p l e s h o u l d e x p e c t a d d i -

t i o n a l e a r t h q u a k e s o f e v e n g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n s a n d t h r o u g h o u t a n e v e n

g r e a t e r p o r t i o n o f t h e c o u n t r y . T h e s e r u m o r s w e r e u n t r u e a n d l a c k e d a n y r a -

t i o n a l f o u n d a t i o n . F e s t i n g e r w o n d e r e d w h y p e o p l e w o u l d s p r e a d s u c h c a t a -

s t r o p h i c a n d a n x i e t y - i n c r e a s i n g i d e a s . I t o c c u r r e d t o h i m o v e r t i m e t h a t

p e r h a p s t h e r u m o r s w e r e n o t a n x i e t y i n c r e a s i n g , b u t anxiety justifying. T h a t is,

t h e s e p e o p l e w e r e v e r y f r i g h t e n e d , e v e n t h o u g h t h e y l i v e d o u t s i d e t h e d a n g e r

a r e a . T h i s c r e a t e d cognitive dissonance: t h e i r c o g n i t i o n o f i n t e n s e f e a r w a s o u t

o f t u n e w i t h t h e f a c t t h a t t h e y w e r e , i n r e a l i t y , s a f e . T h e r e f o r e , t h e p e o p l e

s p r e a d r u m o r s o f g r e a t e r d i s a s t e r s t o j u s t i f y t h e i r f e a r s a n d r e d u c e t h e i r d i s s o -

n a n c e . W i t h o u t r e a l i z i n g i t , t h e y m a d e t h e i r v i e w o f t h e w o r l d fit w i t h w h a t

t h e y w e r e f e e l i n g a n d h o w t h e y w e r e b e h a v i n g .

THEORETICAL P R O P O S I T I O N S

F e s t i n g e r t h e o r i z e d t h a t n o r m a l l y w h a t y o u p u b l i c l y s t a t e will b e s u b s t a n t i a l l y

t h e s a m e a s y o u r p r i v a t e o p i n i o n o r b e l i e f . T h e r e f o r e , i f y o u b e l i e v e " X " b u t

p u b l i c l y s t a t e " n o t X , " y o u will e x p e r i e n c e t h e d i s c o m f o r t o f c o g n i t i v e d i s s o -

n a n c e . H o w e v e r , i f y o u k n o w t h a t t h e r e a s o n s f o r y o u r s t a t e m e n t o f " n o t X "

w e r e c l e a r l y j u s t i f i e d b y p r e s s u r e s , p r o m i s e s o f r e w a r d s , o r t h r e a t s o f p u n i s h -

m e n t , t h e n y o u r d i s s o n a n c e will b e r e d u c e d o r e l i m i n a t e d . T h e r e f o r e — a n d

t h i s i s t h e k e y — t h e m o r e y o u v i e w y o u r i n c o n s i s t e n t b e h a v i o r t o b e o f y o u r

o w n c h o o s i n g , t h e g r e a t e r will b e y o u r d i s s o n a n c e .

O n e w a y f o r y o u t o r e d u c e t h i s u n p l e a s a n t d i s s o n a n c e i s t o a l t e r y o u r

o p i n i o n t o b r i n g i t i n t o a g r e e m e n t , o r c o n s o n a n c e , w i t h y o u r b e h a v i o r . F e s -

t i n g e r c o n t e n d e d t h a t c h a n g e s i n a t t i t u d e s a n d o p i n i o n s will b e g r e a t e s t w h e n

d i s s o n a n c e i s l a r g e . T h i n k a b o u t i t f o r a m o m e n t . S u p p o s e s o m e o n e o f f e r s y o u

a g r e a t d e a l o f m o n e y t o s t a t e , i n p u b l i c , s p e c i f i c v i e w s t h a t a r e t h e o p p o s i t e o f

y o u r t r u e v i e w s , a n d y o u a g r e e t o d o s o . T h e n s u p p o s e s o m e o n e e l s e m a k e s t h e

s a m e r e q u e s t b u t o f f e r s y o u j u s t a l i t t l e m o n e y , a n d e v e n t h o u g h i t h a r d l y s e e m s

w o r t h it, y o u a g r e e a n y w a y . I n w h i c h c a s e will y o u r d i s s o n a n c e b e t h e g r e a t e s t ?

L o g i c a l l y , y o u w o u l d e x p e r i e n c e m o r e d i s s o n a n c e i n t h e l e s s - m o n e y s i t u a t i o n

b e c a u s e y o u w o u l d f e e l i n s u f f i c i e n t j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r y o u r a t t i t u d e - d i s c r e p a n t b e -

h a v i o r . T h e r e f o r e , a c c o r d i n g t o F e s t i n g e r ' s m e o r y , y o u r p r i v a t e o p i n i o n w o u l d

s h i f t m o r e i n t h e l i t t l e - m o n e y c o n d i t i o n . L e t ' s s e e h o w F e s t i n g e r ( w i t h t h e h e l p

o f h i s a s s o c i a t e J a m e s C a r l s m i t h ) s e t a b o u t t e s t i n g t h i s t h e o r y .

M E T H O D

I m a g i n e y o u a r e a u n i v e r s i t y s t u d e n t e n r o l l e d i n a n i n t r o d u c t o r y p s y c h o l o g y

c o u r s e . O n e o f y o u r c o u r s e r e q u i r e m e n t s i s t o p a r t i c i p a t e f o r 3 h o u r s d u r i n g t h e

s e m e s t e r a s a p a r t i c i p a n t i n p s y c h o l o g y e x p e r i m e n t s . Y o u c h e c k t h e b u l l e t i n

Reading 24 Thoughts out of Tune 185

b o a r d t h a t p o s t s t h e v a r i o u s s t u d i e s b e i n g c a r r i e d o u t b y p r o f e s s o r s a n d g r a d u -

a t e s t u d e n t s , a n d y o u s i g n u p f o r o n e t h a t l a s t s 2 h o u r s a n d d e a l s w i t h " m e a s u r e s

o f p e r f o r m a n c e . " I n F e s t i n g e r a n d C a r l s m i t h ' s s t u d y , a s i n m a n y p s y c h o l o g y e x -

p e r i m e n t s , t h e t r u e p u r p o s e o f t h e s t u d y c a n n o t b e r e v e a l e d t o t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s

b e c a u s e t h i s c o u l d b i a s t h e i r r e s p o n s e s a n d i n v a l i d a t e t h e r e s u l t s . T h e g r o u p o f

p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t h e o r i g i n a l s t u d y c o n s i s t e d o f 7 1 m a l e , l o w e r - d i v i s i o n p s y c h o l o g y

s t u d e n t s .

Y o u a r r i v e a t t h e l a b o r a t o r y a t t h e a p p o i n t e d t i m e ( h e r e , t h e l a b o r a t o r y

i s n o t h i n g m o r e t h a n a r o o m w i t h c h a i r s ) . Y o u a r e t o l d t h a t t h i s e x p e r i m e n t

t a k e s a l i t t l e o v e r a n h o u r , s o i t h a d t o b e s c h e d u l e d f o r 2 h o u r s . B e c a u s e e x t r a

t i m e will b e a v a i l a b l e , t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r i n f o r m s y o u t h a t s o m e p e o p l e f r o m

t h e p s y c h o l o g y d e p a r t m e n t a r e i n t e r v i e w i n g p a r t i c i p a n t s a b o u t t h e i r e x p e r i -

e n c e s a s p a r t i c i p a n t s , a n d h e a s k s y o u t o t a l k t o t h e m a f t e r p a r t i c i p a t i n g . T h e n

y o u a r e g i v e n y o u r f i r s t t a s k .

A t r a y c o n t a i n i n g 1 2 s p o o l s i s p l a c e d i n f r o n t o f y o u . Y o u a r e t o l d t o

e m p t y t h e t r a y o n t o t h e t a b l e , r e f i l l t h e t r a y w i t h t h e s p o o l s , e m p t y i t a g a i n ,

r e f i l l i t , a n d s o o n . Y o u a r e t o w o r k w i t h o n e h a n d a n d a t y o u r o w n s p e e d .

W h i l e t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r l o o k s o n w i t h a s t o p w a t c h a n d t a k e s n o t e s , y o u d o

t h i s o v e r a n d o v e r f o r 3 0 m i n u t e s . T h e n t h e t r a y i s r e m o v e d a n d y o u a r e g i v e n

a b o a r d w i t h 4 8 s q u a r e p e g s . Y o u r t a s k n o w i s t o t u r n e a c h p e g a q u a r t e r o f a

t u r n c l o c k w i s e a n d t o r e p e a t t h i s o v e r a n d o v e r f o r 3 0 m i n u t e s m o r e ! I f t h i s

s o u n d s i n c r e d i b l y b o r i n g t o y o u , t h a t w a s p r e c i s e l y t h e i n t e n t i o n o f t h e r e -

s e a r c h e r s . T h i s p a r t o f t h e s t u d y w a s , i n t h e a u t h o r s ' w o r d s , " i n t e n d e d t o p r o -

v i d e , f o r e a c h p a r t i c i p a n t u n i f o r m l y , a n e x p e r i e n c e a b o u t w h i c h h e w o u l d

h a v e a s o m e w h a t n e g a t i v e o p i n i o n " ( p . 2 0 5 ) . U n d o u b t e d l y , y o u w o u l d a g r e e

t h a t t h i s o b j e c t i v e w a s a c c o m p l i s h e d . F o l l o w i n g c o m p l e t i o n o f t h e t a s k s , t h e

e x p e r i m e n t r e a l l y b e g a n .

T h e p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e r a n d o m l y a s s i g n e d t o o n e o f t h r e e c o n d i t i o n s . I n

t h e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n , t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s , a f t e r c o m p l e t i n g t h e t a s k s , w e r e t a k e n

t o a n o t h e r r o o m w h e r e t h e y w e r e i n t e r v i e w e d a b o u t t h e i r r e a c t i o n s t o t h e e x -

p e r i m e n t t h e y h a d j u s t c o m p l e t e d . T h e r e s t o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e l u r e d a lit-

t l e f u r t h e r i n t o t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l m a n i p u l a t i o n s . F o l l o w i n g t h e t a s k s , t h e

e x p e r i m e n t e r s p o k e t o t h e m a s i f t o e x p l a i n t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e s t u d y . H e t o l d

e a c h o f t h e m t h a t t h e y w e r e a m o n g t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n " g r o u p A , " w h o p e r -

f o r m e d t h e t a s k s w i t h n o p r i o r i n f o r m a t i o n , w h i l e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n " g r o u p B " al-

ways r e c e i v e d d e s c r i p t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e t a s k s p r i o r t o e n t e r i n g t h e

l a b . H e w e n t o n t o s t a t e t h a t t h e i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d b y g r o u p B p a r t i c i p a n t s

w a s t h a t t h e t a s k s w e r e f u n a n d i n t e r e s t i n g a n d t h a t t h i s m e s s a g e w a s d e l i v e r e d

b y a n u n d e r g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t p o s i n g a s a p a r t i c i p a n t w h o h a d a l r e a d y c o m -

p l e t e d t h e t a s k s . I t i s i m p o r t a n t t o k e e p i n m i n d t h a t n o n e o f t h i s w a s t r u e ; i t

w a s a f a b r i c a t i o n i n t e n d e d t o m a k e t h e n e x t , c r u c i a l p a r t o f t h e s t u d y r e a l i s t i c

a n d b e l i e v a b l e . T h i s w a s , i n o t h e r w o r d s , a c o v e r s t o r y .

T h e e x p e r i m e n t e r t h e n l e f t t h e r o o m f o r a few m i n u t e s . U p o n r e t u r n -

i n g , h e c o n t i n u e d t o s p e a k b u t n o w a p p e a r e d s o m e w h a t c o n f u s e d a n d u n c e r -

t a i n . H e e x p l a i n e d , a l i t t l e e m b a r r a s s e d , t h a t t h e u n d e r g r a d u a t e w h o u s u a l l y

186 Chapter VI Emotion and Motivation

g i v e s t h e i n f o r m a t i o n t o g r o u p B p a r t i c i p a n t s h a d c a l l e d i n s i c k , t h a t a p a r t i c i -

p a n t f r o m g r o u p B w a s w a i t i n g , a n d t h a t t h e y w e r e h a v i n g t r o u b l e f i n d i n g

s o m e o n e t o fill i n f o r h i m . H e t h e n v e r y p o l i t e l y a s k e d t h e p a r t i c i p a n t i f h e

w o u l d b e w i l l i n g t o j ó i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a n d b e t h e o n e t o i n f o r m t h e w a i t i n g

p a r t i c i p a n t .

T h e e x p e r i m e n t e r o f f e r e d s o m e o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s a d o l l a r e a c h f o r

t h e i r h e l p , w h i l e o t h e r s w e r e o f f e r e d $ 2 0 ( a s i z a b l e a m o u n t o f m o n e y i n

1 9 5 9 ) . A f t e r a p a r t i c i p a n t a g r e e d , h e w a s g i v e n a s h e e t o f p a p e r m a r k e d

" F o r G r o u p B " o n w h i c h w a s w r i t t e n " I t w a s v e r y e n j o y a b l e , I h a d a l o t o f

f u n , I e n j o y e d m y s e l f , i t w a s i n t r i g u i n g , i t w a s e x c i t i n g . " T h e p a r t i c i p a n t w a s

t h e n p a i d e i t h e r $ 1 o r $ 2 0 a n d t a k e n i n t o t h e w a i t i n g r o o m t o m e e t t h e i n -

c o m i n g " p a r t i c i p a n t . " P a r t i c i p a n t s w e r e l e f t a l o n e i n t h e w a i t i n g r o o m f o r 2

m i n u t e s , a f t e r w h i c h t i m e t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r r e t u r n e d , t h a n k e d t h e m f o r

t h e i r h e l p , a n d l e d t h e m t o t h e i n t e r v i e w r o o m , w h e r e t h e y w e r e a s k e d

t h e i r o p i n i o n s o f t h e t a s k s e x a c t l y a s h a d b e e n a s k e d o f t h e p a r t i c i p a n t s i n

t h e c o n t r o l c o n d i t i o n .

I f t h i s w h o l e p r o c e d u r e s e e m s a b i t c o m p l i c a t e d , i t r e a l l y i s n o t . T h e b o t -