|1.||Phenomena of motivation have often been explained in terms of an energy model.|
|2.||The energy models used by Freud, McDougall, Lorenz and Tinbergen are outlined briefly.|
|3.||The extent to which these models are considered by their authors to correspond with structures in the nervous system is discussed.|
|4.||The relation between physical energy and the postulated behavioural energies are examined.|
|5.||The number of forms of energy postulated by each author is discussed.|
|6.||These models have had considerable success in discussions of the behaviour of the whole animal.|
|7.||They have, however, certain grave disadvantages. In particular, these arise from a confusion between the properties of physical and behavioural energy, and from attempts to explain multiple processes in terms of simple unitary mechanisms.|
|8.||It seems doubtful whether an energy concept is in fact necessary at all.|
|ANDREW R. J. ( 1956). Some remarks on conflict situations, with special reference to "Emberiza" spp. Brit. J. Anim. Behav. 4, 41-45.|
|BEXTON W. H., HERON W. & SCOTT T. H. ( 1954). Effects of decreased variation in the sensory environment. Canad. J. Psychol. 8, 70-76.|
Questia, a part of Gale, Cengage Learning. www.questia.com
Publication information: Book title: Models and Analogues in Biology. Contributors: Society for Experimental Biology - OrganizationName. Publisher: Academic Press. Place of publication: New York. Publication year: 1960. Page number: 212.
This material is protected by copyright and, with the exception of fair use, may not be further copied, distributed or transmitted in any form or by any means.