The reply of a physiologist to psychologists
The reply of a physiologist to psychologists
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/h0069929
复制
发表时间：
1932-01-01
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Pavlov, IP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Pavlov, IP
本文的前两部分是对古特里和拉什利对条件反射的批评的具体答复。最后一部分是对巴甫洛夫认为违反成功调查目标的某些心理学倾向的攻击。在第一部分中，他反对心理学家接受条件反射原则为终极原则，并将其应用于每一种学习形式，从而将学习的所有个体特征解释为一个过程，而不进行实验验证。他反对古特里对条件反射过程的几个方面重新表述的解释，如延迟条件反射、条件反射和非条件刺激的时间顺序的不可逆性、条件反射的消失、条件影响在其形成过程中的逐渐强化以及对邻近其他刺激的条件反射。在第二部分中，他陈述了他所认为的反射理论的基本要素，即决定论、分析和综合以及功能对结构的适应。然后，他试图反驳拉什利的论点，反对本地化和特殊性的结构功能关系。主要的观点是：（1）拉什利对反射弧概念的解释过于严格，以致他对反射弧概念的实验检验不够充分;（2）除了与胚胎组织的遥远类比之外，他没有提出任何东西来代替反射弧概念。在第三部分中，科勒对动物行为的完形解释受到了批评，目的主义者的其他解释也受到了批评。（PsycINFO数据库记录（c）2016阿帕，保留所有权利）
The first two parts of the paper are specific replies to criticisms of the conditioned reflex by Guthrie and Lashley. The last part is an attack on certain tendencies of psychology which Pavlov feels violate the aims of successful investigation. In Part I, he objects to the psychologist's accepting the principle of conditioning as ultimate and applying it to every form of learning, so that all the individual features of learning are explained as one process, without experimental verification. He objects to several of Guthrie's reformulated explanations of aspects of the conditioning process, as delayed conditioning, irreversibility of temporal order of conditioned and unconditioned stimuli, extinction of the conditioned reflex, the gradual intensification of the conditioned affect during its formation, and conditioning to other stimuli in the neighborhood. In Part II, he states what he regards as the fundamental elements of the reflex theory, ie, determinism, analysis and synthesis, and the adaptation of function to structure. He then attempts to refute Lashley's arguments against localization and specificity of structure-function relation. The main points are (1) that Lashley's interpretation of the reflex arc concept is too rigid, so that his experimental tests of it have been inadequate, and (2) that he has offered nothing in place of it except remote analogies to embryonal tissue. In Part III, Köhler's Gestalt interpretations of animal behavior are criticized, as are also the alternative explanations of the purposivists.(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)