Abstract
Two directions of development are claimed as necessary to the long-term viability of any academic specialty. They are named “vertical and horizontal” development for the present discussion, and their role in relation to a constructive project for theoretical psychology is articulated here. Vertical development involves critical reflection inward toward the concepts, methods, and questions relevant to psychology and more specifically to the theoretical psychology community. Horizontal development involves attunement to new ideas and empirical findings in fields outside of psychology, with evaluation of their implication for psychological theory. Examples of the two directions of development are offered, and they are related to the long-range project of constructive project for theoretical psychology, identified as the effort to make conceptual contributions to the human pool of resources for problem-solving, and to aid in engendering the wise application of these resources.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This basis for this claim is personal experience in communities of philosophers, for example, as a Fellow of the University of Pittsburgh Center for Philosophy of Science.
- 2.
There are, of course, always exceptions. In this case one important exception is Mark Bickhard’s interactionist model of cognition (Bickhard, 2009).
- 3.
These controversies are reviewed by Ichikawa (2014).
References
Andersen, H. (2016). Collaboration, interdisciplinarity, and the epistemology of contemporary science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 66, 1–10.
Bennett, M. R., & Hacker, P. M. S. (2003). Philosophical foundations of neuroscience. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bickhard, M. H. (2009). The interactivist model. Synthese, 166(3), 547–591.
Calvert, J., & Fujimura, J. H. (2011). Calculating life? Dueling discourses in interdisciplinary systems biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 42(2), 155–163.
Chandrasekharan, S., & Tovey, M. (2012). Sum, Quorum, Tether: Design principles underlying external representations that promote sustainability. Pragmatics & Cognition, 20(3), 447–482.
Damjanovic, L., & Santiago, J. (2016). Contrasting vertical and horizontal representations of affect in emotional visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(1), 62–73.
Deutsch, M. (2009). Experimental philosophy and the theory of reference. Mind & Language, 24(4), 445–466.
Dutta, D., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2017). Doing to being: Farming actions in a community coalesce into pro-environment motivations and values. Environmental Education Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1392485
Einstein, A. (1916). The foundation of the general theory of relativity. Annalen der Physik, 14, 769–822.
Feest, U. (2005). Operationism in psychology: What the debate is about, what the debate should be about. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 41(2), 131–149.
Feyerabend, P. (1979). Science in a free society. New York: Routledge.
Fodor, J. (1975). The language of thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gottwald, J. M., Elsner, B., & Pollatos, O. (2015). Good is up—Spatial metaphors in action observation. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1605. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01605
Harré, R., & Parrott, W. G. (1996). The emotions. In Social, cultural and biological dimensions. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Held, B. S. (2004). The negative side of positive psychology. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 44(1), 9–46.
Ichikawa, J. J. (2014). Intuition in contemporary philosophy. In L. M. Osbeck & B. S. Held (Eds.), Rational intuition (pp. 192–210). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Jung, C. G. (1971). Psychological types (R. F. C. Hull, Trans., Vol. 6). London, UK: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Kastenhofer, K. (2013). Two sides of the same coin? The (techno) epistemic cultures of systems and synthetic biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 44(2), 130–140.
Kennefick, D. (2016). Traveling at the speed of thought: Einstein and the quest for gravitational waves. Princeton University Press.
Knobe, J., & Nichols, S. (Eds.). (2013). Experimental philosophy, Vol. 2. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Koch, S. (1951). Theoretical psychology, 1950: An overview. Psychological Review, 58(4), 295–301.
Koch, S. (Ed.). (1959). Psychology: A study of a science. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Koch, S. (1992). Psychology’s Bridgman vs Bridgman’s Bridgman. Theory & Psychology, 2(3), 261–290.
Koch, S. (1993). ‘Psychology’ or ‘the psychological studies’. American Psychologist, 48(8), 902.
Koch, S., & Leary, D. E. (1992). A century of psychology as science. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton University Press.
Machado, A., & Silva, F. J. (2007). Toward a richer view of the scientific method: The role of conceptual analysis. American Psychologist, 62(7), 671–681.
Machamer, P., & Osbeck, L. (2000). The new science of learning: Mechanism, models, and muddles. Themes in Education, 1(1), 39–54.
Machery, E., Mallon, R., Nichols, S., & Stich, S. P. (2004). Semantics, cross-cultural style. Cognition, 92(3), 1–12.
Minke, K. A. (1987). A comparative analysis of the general theories of modern behaviorism. In A. Staats & L. Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 315–343). New York: Plenum Press.
Nersessian, N. J. (2008). Creating scientific concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Osbeck, L. (2005). Method and theoretical psychology. Theory and Psychology, 15(1), 5–26.
Osbeck, L. (2009). Transformations in cognitive science: Implications and issues posed. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 29(1), 16–33.
Osbeck, L. (2014). Scientific reasoning as sense-making: Implications for qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Psychology, 1(1), 34–46.
Osbeck, L. M. (2018). Epistemic and ethical constraints in personal and social constructions: A response to Raskin and Debany. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 31(4), 388–399.
Osbeck, L. M., & Held, B. S. (Eds.). (2014). Rational intuition: Philosophical roots, scientific investigations. Cambridge University Press.
Osbeck, L. M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2014). Situating distributed cognition. Philosophical Psychology, 27(1), 82–97.
Osbeck, L. M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2017). Epistemic identities in interdisciplinary science. Perspectives on Science, 25(2), 226–260.
Osbeck, L., Malone, K., & Nersessian, N. (2007). Dissenters in the sanctuary: Expanding frameworks in ‘mainstream’ cognitive science. Theory and Psychology. Special issue: Critical Engagement with Mainstream Psychology, 17(2), 243–264.
Osbeck, L. M., Nersessian, N. J., Malone, K. R., & Newstetter, W. C. (2011). Science as psychology: Sense-making and identity in science practice. Cambridge University Press.
Pandit, G., & Dosch, H. G. (2013). The frontiers of theory development in physics: A methodological study in its dynamical complexity. Los Angeles: Trebol Press.
Protevi, J. (2007). New directions in philosophy and cognitive science. New York: Palgrave.
Sauer, T. (2004). Albert Einstein’s 1916 review article on general relativity. arXiv preprint physics/0405066.
Staats, A. W. (1999). Unifying psychology requires new infrastructure, theory, method, and a research agenda. Review of General Psychology, 3, 3–13.
Stam, H. J. (2015). The neurosciences and the search for a unified psychology: The science and esthetics of a single framework. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1467. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01467
Still, A., & Costall, A. (1991). Against cognitivism: Alternative foundations for cognitive psychology. London, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Stuart, M. (2018). How thought experiments increase understanding. In M. T. Stuart, Y. J. H. Fehige, & J. R. Brown (Eds.), The Routledge companion to thought experiments (pp. 526–544). London, UK: Routledge.
Teo, T. (2015). Critical psychology: A geography of intellectual engagement and resistance. American Psychologist, 70(3), 243–254.
Thorne, K. S. (1980). Gravitational-wave research: Current status and future prospects. Review of Modern Physics, 52(2), 285–297.
Tissaw, M. A. (2007). Making sense of neonatal imitation. Theory & Psychology, 17(2), 217–242.
Tissaw, M. A., & Osbeck, L. M. (2007). On critical engagement with the mainstream: Introduction. Theory & Psychology, 17(2), 155–168.
Wertz, F., Charmaz, K., McMullen, L., Josselson, R., Anderson, R., & McSpadden, E. (2011). Five ways of doing qualitative research. New York: Guilford Press.
Williamson, T. (2011). Philosophical expertise and the burden of proof. Metaphilosophy, 42(3), 215–229.
Wilson, R. A. (2014). Ten questions concerning extended cognition. Philosophical Psychology, 27, 19–33.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Osbeck, L.M. (2019). Vertical and Horizontal Development in Theoretical Psychology. In: Teo, T. (eds) Re-envisioning Theoretical Psychology. Palgrave Studies in the Theory and History of Psychology. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16762-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16762-2_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16761-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-16762-2
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)