The Missing Theory II: Further Musings on the Development of a New Zeitgeist for Clinical Psychology

By Wynne, Louis | Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry, January 1, 2007 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

The Missing Theory II: Further Musings on the Development of a New Zeitgeist for Clinical Psychology

Wynne, Louis, Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry

Clinical adult psychology can be rejuvenated and liberated from its dependence on psychiatry by pursuing a new zeitgeist free of operationist thinking and the hypothetico-deductive analysis of its data. Such a new zeitgeist would emphasize the paramount importance of language in human behavior, as well as the cogency of an existential-theatrical approach that has its roots in the works of the 16th-century humanists rather than, as now, in the works of Newton and Descartes 100 years later.

Keywords: hypothetico-deductive research; zeitgeist; theater; existentialism; operationism

Modern psychology is generally thought to have begun in the late 19th century with the essentially simultaneous work of William James in 1875 and Wilhelm Wundt in 1879. Clinical psychology, with which we will be chiefly concerned in this article, did have significant precursors before World War II (Routh, 1996), but it was that calamity that provided the context within which it, for what I will suggest was a mere 30 or 40 years, could thrive.

Psychology wanted more than anything else to be scientific, and it took its direction, as it has in every decade for the last 100 years, from the intellectual fashion current in the exact sciences. Early psychologists actually performed what we now would call single-case experimental designs, but after the publication of Fisher's The Design of Experiments in 1935, it soon became de rigeur for all doctoral dissertations and papers submitted to the preeminent journals, for example, the Journal of Experimental Psychology and the Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, to be based on the analysis of variance of groups of subjects. Hence, the prime requirement for the PhD candidate in experimental psychology was mastery of, for example, The Design and Analysis of Experiments in Psychology and Education (Lindquist, 1953).

Clinical psychology imposed similar requirements on its graduate students and those who would submit papers to its journals. Case studies were tolerated in clinical psychology journals, but tolerated was indeed le mot juste for their editors' attitude toward departures from the experimental design norm.

The philosophy of science ascendant in the exact sciences in the 1930s was the logical positivism of the Vienna Circle, and it was imported into the United States under the name operationism by P. W. Bridgman. Stanley S. Stevens, author of the widely used Handbook of Experimental Psychology, published in 1956, promoted it actively among his colleagues at Harvard, where he was a professor, and at places more remote such as the University of Iowa.

It was the merging of operationism with the hypothetico-deductive model and the analysis of variance that made and, I argue, doomed modern clinical psychology. Other subspecialties of psychology will have to assess the damage to their own bailiwicks for themselves.

Operationism is the view that scientific reality emerges from sets of specified operations. A favorite example in the 1950s was manifest anxiety, but the concept of intelligence will be more familiar to readers of EHPP. Intelligence is that "thing" that emerges when one submits a subject to a set of operations that include the Digit Span and Vocabulary subtests of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III.

The hypothetico-deductive model, under which essentially all research in psychology still labors, is the view that knowledge is secured by (a) formulating hypotheses regarding the relationship between empirical variables; (b) designing experiments to test those hypotheses by arranging groups of experimental subjects to be amenable to analysis of variance (or, now that computers have helped us compound the error [no pun intended] of our ways: MANOVA); (c) rejecting the null hypothesis at a given level of confidence (e.g., p < .05); and (d) making the statistical inference that there really is a difference between the experimental groups on the empirical variable(s) measured.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

The Missing Theory II: Further Musings on the Development of a New Zeitgeist for Clinical Psychology


Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?