Why was wundt criticized

He introduced psychology as a science and set the foundations for experimental psychology. This enabled others to build on his foundations and introduce new theories such as; Edward Titchener. However, many people including some of his students have criticised some of his contributions for a number of reasons.

Bechtel, W. A companion to cognitive science. USA: Blackwell Publishing. Freedheim, D. Handbook of psychology: Volume 1 history of psychology. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons. Henley, T. Connections in the history and systems of psychology. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin Company. Hergenhahn, B. An introduction to the history of psychology. USA: Cengage Learning.

Nitta, Y. Analecta Husserliana: The yearbook of phenomenological research. Holland : D. Reidel publishing company. Pickren, W. A history of modern psychology in context. Robinson, D. New York: Plenum Publishers. Sharma, R. Experimental psychology. Singh, A. The comprehensive history of psychology.

Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publisher. Wundt believed that there were two key components that make up the contents of the human mind: sensations and feelings. In order to understand the mind, Wundt believed that researchers needed to do more than simply identify the structure or elements of the mind. Instead, it was essential to look at the processes and activities that occur as people experience the world around them. Wundt focused on making the introspection process as structured and precise as possible.

Observers were highly trained and the process itself was rigid and highly-controlled. In many instances, respondents were asked to simply respond with a "yes" or "no.

The goal of this process was to make introspection as scientific as possible. Edward Titchener , a student of Wundt's, also utilized this technique although he has been accused of misrepresenting many of Wundt's original ideas. While Wundt was interested in looking at the conscious experience as a whole, Titchener instead focused on breaking down mental experiences into individual components and asked individuals to describe their mental experiences of events.

While introspection has fallen out of favor as a research technique, there are many potential benefits to this sort of self-reflection and self-analysis. While Wundt's experimental techniques did a great deal to advance the cause of making psychology a more scientific discipline, the introspective method had a number of notable limitations. The use of introspection as an experimental technique was often criticized, particularly Titchener's use of the method.

Schools of thought including functionalism and behaviorism believed that introspection lacked scientific reliability and objectivity. Because the process is so subjective, it is impossible to examine or repeat the results. A few other problems with introspection:. Also, because observers have to first be trained by the researchers, there is always the possibility that this training introduces a bias to the results. Those engaged in introspection might be thinking or feeling things because of how they have been influenced and trained by the experimenters.

Research has also shown that people are largely unaware of many of the workings of their own minds, yet are surprisingly unaware of this unawareness. Cognitive biases are a good example of how people are often unaware of their own thoughts and biases. Despite this, people tend to be very confident in their introspections. When evaluating the self and others, people give greater weight to introspection about themselves while judging others on their outward behavior.

The problem is that even when introspections don't provide useful or accurate information, people remain confident that their interpretations are correct, a phenomenon known as the introspection illusion. The use of introspection as a tool for looking inward is an important part of self-awareness and is even used in psychotherapy as a way to help clients gain insight into their own feelings and behavior.

While Wundt's efforts contributed a great deal to the development and advancement of experimental psychology, researchers now recognize the numerous limitations and pitfalls of using introspection as an experimental technique.

Ever wonder what your personality type means? Sign up to find out more in our Healthy Mind newsletter.

Brock AC. The History of Introspection Revisited. In: Clegg JW, editor. Self-Observation in the Social Sciences. Hergenhahn B. Indeed, parts of Wundt's theory were developed and promoted by his one-time student, Edward Titchener, who described his system as Structuralism , or the analysis of the basic elements that constitute the mind.

Wundt wanted to study the structure of the human mind using introspection. Wundt believed in reductionism. That is, he believed consciousness could be broken down or reduced to its basic elements without sacrificing any of the properties of the whole. Wundt argued that conscious mental states could be scientifically studied using introspection.

He trained psychology students to make observations that were biased by personal interpretation or previous experience, and used the results to develop a theory of conscious thought. Highly trained assistants would be given a stimulus such as a ticking metronome and would reflect on the experience.

They would report what the stimulus made them think and feel. The same stimulus, physical surroundings and instructions were given to each person. Wundt's method of introspection did not remain a fundamental tool of psychological experimentation past the early 's. His greatest contribution was to show that psychology could be a valid experimental science. Therefore, one way Wundt contributed to the development of psychology was to do his research in carefully controlled conditions, i.