Collecting, classification. This kind of approach is exemplified by the work of Charles Darwin, and provided the data he used as the basis for his theory of evolution. It basically involves travelling to different locations, collecting as many examples/instances as possible of different species (plants, animals, insects). The next step is to try to find ways of logically grouping the resulting samples in some kind of systematic classification. Animal Studies\n(incorporates 'studies of non-humans', ethology, comparative studies of animal behaviour, field observation). An obvious first question here might be 'why are studies of animal behaviour being presented in a course to do with human psychology'? The basic argument is that, with care, studies of animals can provide insight into at least some aspects of human behaviour and experience. As the discussion in the perspective evolutionary psychology argued, our evolutionary background hasn't just resulted in the particular form of our bodies, but our behaviour and experience as well (or at least some aspects of them). Comparative psychology. This approach involves comparing humans with other species, looking for common factors, for example mating patterns or aggression. Much comparative psychology has involved laboratory studies of creatures such as rats and pigeons, looking in particular at the learning of behaviours. Ethology\nThis approach, in contrast with comparative psychology, avoids laboratory work, as it aims to study animals in their natural environment, based on field observation, carefully observing different aspects and sequences of behaviour. Ethologists place particular emphasis on an extensive observational phase, before attempts are made to analyse the data. For example, studies of non-verbal communication in animals have provided insights into human gestures and expressive movements. Ethologists would, of course, acknowledge that many human gestures are culturally-specific, and probably not directly related to our evolutionary/biological heritage. Nonetheless, they would point to certain aspects of human expressions which seem to arise in most or all human societies, and which seem to have relatively clear links with animal behaviours. Ethical issues in animal research (and psychology in general)\nWith research on animals, we come to the very important topic of the ethics involved – the possible mistreatment of animals that can occur with those approaches which involve painful and/or damaging intervention in the animal's natural life.\nThe strongest argument in favour of animal research involving pain is the potential value of the research, much of which would never be allowed to be done on humans. An example might be Seligman's work on learned helplessness, which involved repeated electric shocks to dogs (one dog died as a result of the experiments). Are the resulting insights (e.g. into institutionalisation, and how to counter it) valuable enough to outweigh the possible distress to animals? To place this in context, it might be argued that the current carnivorous practices of the majority of the human race result in much greater suffering, and on a vastly greater scale, than carefully-regulated animal research. (The average battery chicken would probably cluck with joy at the thought of living in a nice, cushy animal research laboratory). However, many psychologists now feel very uneasy about humanity's easy assumption of the right to inflict suffering on other species, simply because they are less evolved than us (there might be a complaint or two if an advanced race of aliens used the same argument towards us). \nIt is interesting to see how viewpoints on this have changed over time – in the 19th century, it was thought by some scientists that animals couldn't feel pain, that their cries and other responses (to stimuli which would invoke pain in humans) were not correlated with actual feeling. This is hardly an argument that would be used today though it is perhaps instructive to reflect that it was only at the end of the 20th century that many medical practitioners were persuaded that human infants feel pain. It remains to be seen whether future generations will view our current attitudes to animal research in the ways we now look back at those 19th century scientists. \nPsychology as a whole is constantly reflecting on and evolving its ethical practices – current practice is clearly explained in the BPS ethical guidelines Ethical issues are more important to psychological research than most other sciences, because its primary research is on humans themselves, as opposed to electrons, molecules, plants etc. Ethical considerations therefore occupy a prime place with any of the research methods discussed in DSE 212, and you are encouraged to pay careful attention to this aspect with the research you will conduct yourself as part of the course. 
Biological psychology makes the undeniable point that psychological processes rest upon a biological substrate. Psychological phenomena occur within the context of our physical embodiment, so biological structures and processes clearly play a role in behaviour and cognition. (This is clearly illustrated by alterations in behaviour and emotional state produced by ingestion of drugs, exercise, brain damage etc.). Biological psychology therefore explores the potential roles biology can play in attempts at psychological explanation.\nThere are two main types of psychological explanation coming from biological perspectives. Causal explanations focus on the immediate precursors or causes (e.g. physiological processes) of a behaviour or characteristic; essentially, how a particular behaviour has occurred. These will be explored further in the rest of this section. Functional explanations, in contrast, look at why a particular behaviour or characteristic has evolved, i.e. the possible adaptive value of the behaviour seen within the context of neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory. This is examined in the section on evolutionary psychology. A central debate within psychology is the relative influence of social and biological factors. Relatively few psychologists would take the position that biology alone determines psychology, i.e. can fully explain all psychological phenomena. Psychological phenomena are usually seen by many biological psychologists as the result of a complex interdependence between biological and social processes. This is fully in line with the emphasis in modern genetics on gene-environment interaction, rather than seeing genes alone as a causal influence. For example, the same biological influences can have different effects in different social contexts. Social context can in turn affect biology (such as stress affecting the functioning of the heart). \nThe central focus of biological psychology looks at how the workings of the central nervous system (which includes the brain) affects behaviour and cognition. There may also be an emphasis on lessons that can be learned from the study of non-human nervous systems, looking at commonalities between different animals as well as those aspects in which humans are quite distinct from non-human animals. Although differences between people are examined in biological terms (e.g. in terms of brain damage or reactions to drugs), it is not concerned with what makes each human being unique. It is more concerned with documenting biological universals than with making individuals themselves the unit of analysis, offering a clear distinction here from perspectives like humanistic psychology. A key distinction between biological psychologists and psychologists from other traditions lies in the kinds of questions they ask. For example, a biological psychologist might look at depression in terms of neurotransmitter levels, or a particular genetic inheritance. A social psychologist might examine the depressed person's social networks and relationships. A more sociologically-influenced psychologist from a feminist background might in turn see the problem in terms not of the individual or their immediate social surroundings, but as a consequence of wider societal structures, e.g. oppressive gender relations within marriage as an institution. These different 'diagnoses' would lead to quite different courses of action in these three cases: respectively, recommending a course of anti-depressants; suggesting counselling; engaging in wider socio-political transformation. A psychologist taking a holistic viewpoint might conceivably regard all three as potentially useful actions to take.\nIn terms of methodology, biological psychology draws on a wide range of methods developed in disciplines such as neurophysiology, physics and chemistry, often involving study of the brain. For example, recording the electric activity of single neurons to see how they react for example to light stimulation, or studying the effects of stimulating neurons electrically. Biochemical analyses can also be used to monitor the activity of chemical neurotransmitters in the brain. Some relatively recent techniques include brain imaging techniques (e.g. positron emission tomography, or PET) and making use of data from the recent decoding of the human genome. In addition to these specialized techniques, biological psychologists also use the experimental method to compare the performance of different groups of people (e.g. with or without brain damage) on various psychological tasks. All the methods discussed above predominantly use an outsider viewpoint – although some recent brain imaging techniques do make use of insider accounts since researchers ask people questions about their experiences as they record brain activity, looking for correlations between the two.
Views: PERSPECTIVES, Bowlby, Darwin, Crick, Ekman, Milner, Plomin, Piaget, Penfield, Pavlov, Sperry, Tooby, Vygotsky, Wundt
Own travel. Certainly, travel is more than the seeing of sights; it is a change that goes on, deep and permanent, in the ideas of living. Miriam Beard. It is often said that travel broadens the mind, but it can also influence the development of psychological theory. For instance, Darwin's travels in South America and the Galapagos Islands are closely associated with his later theory of natural selection. Similarly, William James' travels around Europe allowed him contact with a body of psychological thought (both experimental and psychodynamic) quite different from the tradition developing in the United States. Travel also suggests permanent movement from one country to another. The impact of the movement of psychologists from mainland Europe to the UK and the USA during and following the second world war is discussed in the World War II entry. However, the experience of migration in itself can provide new insights into one's own identity, cultural and social differences and can highlight how we understand ourselves as a member of a specific group or social category. For instance, in developing the information for EPoCH we asked “Has your work been influenced by any historical/cultural/social contexts”. Csikszentmihalyi replies that: Moving from one culture to another (Hungary/Italy/the United States, with many side-trips elsewhere) has been very helpful in relativizing my beliefs, while impressing on me the fundamental similarities among human beings”\n\nWetherell, in reply to the same question states: \n\nI have been influenced by my status as a migrant to Britain and growing up in an ex-colony (New Zealand). Written by: Course Team
Natural History. The term Natural History refers to the study of natural objects (plants, animals, insects etc.), particularly in the field. The natural history method is, in essence, a process of detailed observation and cataloguing and categorization. From which theories( like Darwin's theory of natural selection) 'emerge'. Such emergent theories can then be evaluated by setting up hypotheses and testing them against the data already collected. This is an example of the interaction between induction and the hypthetico-deductive spiral.
Philosophical Methods. Philosophy as an academic discipline covers a wide range of topic areas and methods (see perspective on philosophy). However, as a method, one of its key approaches is that of the thought experiment (these are also sometimes referred to by their German name, Gedanken experiment). These involve trying to bring to light some conceptual or logical factor, by constructing an imaginary situation involving some manipulation of the topic under investigation. The logical consequences of this can then be explored. A classic example would be Searle's 'Chinese room', where the scenario constructed involves a person locked in a room, with Chinese ideograms passed through to him. Although he knows no Chinese, he has been given a set of rules telling him what ideograms to pass out, according to the different symbols which are input. Although the outputs may make sense to Chinese people (if the rules are appropriately constructed), the person in the room can't possibly be said to understand the Chinese terms. \nThis thought experiment therefore acts as a way to argue against the concept of 'strong artificial intelligence (AI)', e.g. the claim that if a computer was devised with programs that could talk and speak as effectively as a human, the computer would actually understand what was being said. We can see from this example, how philosophical methods can help us think through conceptual issues arising from psychology. Philosophical tools might also be used, for example, to help analyse the meaning of the term 'understands'. Careful analysis of the meaning of terms is another key tool of philosophy. There is a contrast with methods such as discourse analysis (DA), which is also concerned with analysis of language, but in a different way. DA tries to look at how the language people use acts to socially construct their worlds, and so analyses relatively large chunks of text. Philosophy typically takes a much more technical approach to language, focusing on the meaning of perhaps a single concept, in terms of its logical implications, relationships with other concepts etc. Traditional scholarship\nThis could refer to a number of different things, but in particular would include reviewing the literature to examine the theoretical and empirical contributions of other researchers. These are weighed against each other, looking for mutual support, inconsistencies etc. It might also involve finding new ways of making sense of existing ideas and/or data by synthesizing and integrating what were previously separate concepts/research.
