by DK
Studies of how chimpanzees communicate with each other shows that their language is complex, although it appears to have less content and variation than human language.
NOAM CHOMSKY
Linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist, and social activist Noam Chomsky was born in Pennsylvania to Jewish parents. He studied philosophy and linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania, where he earned his bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees. Chomsky joined the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1955, becoming an Institute Professor in 1976.
Chomsky is widely known as one of the fathers of modern linguistics, but he is also a political dissident and anarchist. His criticisms of US foreign policy have made him a highly controversial figure. He has won several honorary degrees as well as being a recipient of the Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award, the Dorothy Eldridge Peacemaker Award, and the Orwell Award. He was married to linguist Carol Schatz for 59 years until her death in 2008.
Key works
1957 Syntactic Structures
1965 Cartesian Linguistics
1968 Language and Mind
See also: B.F. Skinner • Jerome Bruner • Steven Pinker • Jean Piaget • Albert Bandura
IN CONTEXT
APPROACH
Theory of mind
BEFORE
1943 American psychiatrist Leo Kanner identifies autism, suggesting it is the result of cold, unemotional parenting.
1944 Austrian pediatrician Hans Asperger describes autism as “an extreme variant of male intelligence.”
1979 British psychiatrists Lorna Wing and Judith Gould discover that there is a wide spectrum of autistic disorders.
AFTER
1989 German-born psychologist Uta Frith states that autistic individuals tend to notice detail, rather than the broader aspects of situations.
1997 UK psychologist Peter Mitchell argues Baron-Cohen’s “theory of mind” fails to explain the exceptional memory and ability in specific areas that some autistic people possess.
Autism is a disorder that affects the brain’s normal development of social and communication skills. Autistic children often react to the world around them in a way that seems bizarre to others. They may have poor communication skills, and social interaction with autistic children tends to be challenging, partly because many of them fail to speak, and partly because many show little interest in others. The majority of autistic children are male, and most remain impaired throughout adulthood. Various explanations for autism have been offered. One of the most recent and influential theories is Simon Baron-Cohen’s “theory of mind” hypothesis, which, when supported by his observations about sex differences in the brain, suggests that “autism is an extreme form of the male brain.”
Brain types
In 2003, Baron-Cohen developed the empathizing—systematizing theory of “female” and “male” brains, which assigns a particular “brain type” to every person, regardless of gender, depending on ability to empathize or systematize. His research suggests that the female brain is largely hard-wired for empathy, with females usually showing more sympathy for others, and greater sensitivity to facial expressions and non-verbal communication. The male brain, by contrast, appears to be geared toward understanding and building systems; it is mostly interested in how things work, as well as their structure, and organization. It is therefore often better at tasks requiring decoding skills, such as map reading.
This does not mean, however, that there is a neat gender split. Baron-Cohen’s experiments showed that around 17 percent of men appear to have an “empathizing brain,” and 17 percent of women have a “systematizing brain,” while many people have a “balanced” brain of equal abilities.
Autistic children sometimes show remarkable aptitude in certain areas, especially those that demand acute observation of fine detail, such as mathematics, drawing, and painting.
"The person with the extreme female brain would be ‘system-blind.’"
Simon Baron-Cohen
Theory of mind
Baron-Cohen believes that autistic people lack a “theory of mind”—the ability to interpret others’ emotions and actions successfully—and so are unable to assess another’s state of mind or intentions. Also, they often have obsessive interests that are centered on some form of system, such as an intense preoccupation with light switches. They focus on tiny details in the system, working out the underlying rules that govern it, or home in on a specific topic, learning everything about it with great accuracy. This mix of little or no empathy and an obsession with systems, along with the higher rate of autism in males, led Baron-Cohen to conclude that autistic people have an extreme “male” brain.
Autism is one of the most severe psychiatric disorders in children, and Baron-Cohen’s ideas have helped to deepen understanding of the condition, raising awareness and making treatment more effective.
SIMON BARON-COHEN
Born in London, Simon Baron-Cohen qualified as a clinical psychologist at London University’s Institute of Psychiatry, and took his PhD at University College, London.
In 1995, he became a fellow in experimental psychology at Trinity College, Cambridge, and is currently the university’s Professor of Developmental Psychopathology and director of its Autism Research Center, where his work involves investigating ways of treating autism, as well as research into possible causes.
His many accolades include the President’s Award and Spearman Medal from the British Psychological Society, plus the Boyd McCandless Award from the American Psychological Association.
From 2009 to 2011, Baron-Cohen served as vice-president of the International Society of Autism Research, and is also vice-president of the National Autistic Society (UK).
Key works
1993 Autism: The Facts
1995 Mindblindness
1999 Teaching Children with Autism to Mind-Read
2003 The Essential Difference
See also: Roger W. Sperry • Heinz Heckhausen • Michael Rutter
INTRODUCTION
Theoretical psychology has largely been concerned with identifying and examining aspects of the mind and behavior that are common to us all, yet philosophers, and later scientists, have always recognized that there are differences in our psychological make-up that render us individuals. Some of the early philosophers explained differences in personality using the idea of the four humors or temperaments, but it was not until the 20th century that there was any truly scientific study of personality.
Behaviorists, as one would expect, saw personality as a product of conditioning, and psychoanalytical theory described personality as the effect of past experience on the unconscious—but these explanations resulted from research into more general theories rather than a study of personality itself. The first psychologist to systematically approach the subject was Gordon Allport, who felt that existing ideas of personality were inadequate. As one of the pioneers of what is now called “trait theory,” he identified a number of different personality traits, which he suggested showed themselves in three different levels in a combination unique to each person. The idea of traits became central to personality psychology and, following Allport’s work, it became a major new area of study.
Personality traits
New ways of analyzing traits, such as Raymond Cattell’s factor analytical method, which identified 16 personality factors, led to refinement of Allport’s theories: reducing the number of traits that combined to form an individual personality. The prominent traits of introversion and extraversion were common to most of these models, and the distinction between them was felt to be a major fa
ctor in determining personality. They were incorporated into Hans Eysenck’s three-factor model, with its basic traits of extraversion—introversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism.
One assumption that was questioned was whether personality traits would result in consistent behavior. Research conducted by Walter Mischel showed that different situations produced different behavior, and suggested that personality traits should be considered in the context of an individual’s perception of and reaction to various circumstances. Not only was personality found to be less consistent than had been assumed, but in some cases there was the possibility of an individual having more than one distinct personality. In a case made famous by a book and film, The Three Faces of Eve, psychiatrists Corbett H. Thigpen and Hervey M. Cleckley described multiple personality disorder, now called dissociative identity disorder.
The intelligence factor
Another factor that distinguishes us as individuals is intelligence. This had been studied from the earliest days of psychology, but had proved difficult to define or measure. Studies are also frequently controversial; since the time of Darwin and Galton, intelligence was assumed to be an inherited characteristic (and carried with it connotations of racial stereotypes and eugenics) rather than one influenced by environment. The issue of nature versus nurture in determining intelligence became key, with psychologists including Raymond Cattell and Hans Eysenck defending a hereditary viewpoint, and others arguing that not only is intelligence affected by environment, but the way it is tested is culturally biased, giving distorted results.
In the early 20th century, British psychologist Charles Spearman had laid the foundations for a more objective, scientific study of intelligence by using statistical techniques to test and measure intelligence. He identified a single factor, the “g factor,” that correlated to all the mental abilities that make up general intelligence. This notion of a single measure of intelligence was challenged by J.P. Guilford, who believed that intelligence consists of a number of different abilities, an idea that led to Raymond Cattell’s theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence—two levels of reasoning and critical thinking.
Research into other areas of psychological difference has included emotions and facial expressions, pioneered by Paul Ekman and Nico Frijda, and psychological disorders, but David Rosenhan’s experiment showed that it is not easy to distinguish the “normal” from the “abnormal.” Individual differences appear to be points on a spectrum, rather than easily labeled divisions— highlighting the complexity and diversity of human psychology.
IN CONTEXT
APPROACH
Intelligence psychometrics
BEFORE
19th century Wilhelm Wundt, Gustav Fechner, and Francis Galton claim that individual differences in people’s cognitive abilities can be empirically measured.
1904 British psychologist Charles Spearman claims intelligence can be summed up in a single number.
1938 British psychologist L.L. Thurstone identifies seven independent factors that make up a person’s “primary abilities” or intelligence.
AFTER
1969 Philip E. Vernon estimates that intelligence is 60 percent inborn.
1974 US psychologist Ellis Paul Torrance produces his own tests of creativity, which are most widely used today.
Although intelligence, and what makes up intelligence, had been discussed since the time of ancient Greece, the first systematic method of measuring intelligence was not developed until 1905, when the French psychologist Alfred Binet was asked to identify children who might benefit from educational assistance. Together with researcher Theodore Simon, he created the “Binet—Simon Scale,” which used memory, attention, and problem-solving tasks to measure and produce a number, or “quotient,” that summarizes intellectual ability. The average intelligence quotient (IQ) was set for convenience at 100, allowing psychologists to categorize people in relation to this score. In practice, around 95 percent of the general population score between 70 and 130, and the top 0.5 percent score over 145, the “genius” level.
Although the scale is still used for most IQ tests today, US psychologist J.P. Guilford believes it has fundamental flaws. Standard intelligence tests, he says, ignore creativity and assume that there is a “general intelligence” that can be represented by an IQ score.
Measuring creativity
By definition, creativity means there is more than one answer to any problem. It requires a different kind of thinking, which Guilford calls “divergent,” since it goes in different directions and produces multiple solutions to a problem. In contrast, traditional IQ tests require thinking that ends up with a single answer: “convergent” thinking.
Guilford thought that creativity was measurable—it is indicated by the number of directions in which a person’s thoughts travel. He devised a number of tests to quantify divergent thinking, including his 1967 “Alternative Uses Test,” which asks participants to write as many uses as they can think of for: (a) a toothpick, (b) a brick, and (c) a paper clip. In his “Consequences Test,” subjects were asked to imagine all the things that might possibly happen if all national and local laws were suddenly abolished. Guilford scored the answers on levels of four key components: originality, fluency, flexibility, and elaboration.
Guilford claims that intelligence is not made up of just one “general factor,” but of three different groups of activities. “Operations” are the intellectual processes we use; there are six types of these, including memory, cognition, and evaluation. “Content” is the type of information or data involved—there are five of these, including visual and auditory content. “Products” are the results of applying operations to content, such as classes or relations, and there are six of these. The many ways in which we combine and use these different types means there may be anything up to 180 (6 × 5 × 6) types of intelligence—more than 100 of these have already been verified.
The complexity of Guilford’s theory and problems with testing mean that his tests are used less frequently than standard IQ tests, but his work has influenced research into intelligence and creativity.
Creative minds see even toothpicks as potentially having hundreds of uses. Guilford’s “Alternative Uses Test” scores people on their ability to think of many original and widely assorted alternatives.
"The person who is capable of producing a large number of ideas per unit of time… has a greater chance of having significant ideas."
J.P. Guilford
J.P. GUILFORD
Joy Paul Guilford was born on a farm in Nebraska. Always markedly intelligent, he was the valedictorian of his high school class. His bachelor’s degree in psychology was interrupted by a spell in the army as a private, but he went on to earn a PhD from Cornell University. In 1928, he returned to Nebraska as an associate professor, then took a position at the University of Southern California (USC) in 1940, remaining there—apart from a short secondment during World War II—until his retirement in 1967. Described as a devoted family man of enormous integrity and generosity, his shyness earned him the nickname “grey ghost” during his time in the army. An influential and prolific researcher, Guilford produced more than 25 books, 30 tests, and 300 articles.
Key works
1936 Psychometric Methods
1967 The Nature of Human Intelligence
See also: Alfred Binet • Raymond Cattell • Hans J. Eysenck • William Stern • David Wechsler
IN CONTEXT
APPROACH
Trait theory
BEFORE
2nd century BCE Galen classifies human temperament according to the f
our humors.
1890 In Principles of Psychology, William James makes an early attempt to define the self as having both an “I” (the knowing self) and a “me” (the experiencing self).
AFTER
1946 Raymond Cattell develops his 16PF (Personality Factors) questionnaire, based on Allport and Odbert’s lexical hypothesis.
1970s Hans J. Eysenck creates the PEN (Psychoticism, Extraversion, Neurotisicm) personality questionnaire.
1993 American psychologist Dan P. McAdam demonstrates the idiographic method in his book The Stories We Live By.
Gordon Allport is sometimes referred to as one of the founding fathers of personality psychology, as he was the first psychologist of modern times to embark on a dedicated study of personality. Since the early work on the four temperaments by Hippocrates (c.400 BCE) and Galen (c.150 CE), there seems to have been no attempt to classify personality in any detail. In the 19th century, personality was barely mentioned in psychology, though there was much discussion of the self, or “ego.”
