Psychology Concerns

Psychology Concerns Psychology concerns itself with the understanding of human behavior. In order to do this effectively, psychologists use a diverse range of perspectives, even when researching a single theme.   This assignment intends to discuss the claim that ‘there is a lot to be gained by studying a topic in psychology from more than one perspective. In order to discuss this claim, it will be necessary to provide definition of the terms ‘conflict, ‘coexist and ‘complement. These terms will then be applied to the themes of language and meaning and sex and gender in order to provide discussion of the claim made. It will become apparent that due to the complexity and multidimensional nature of these perspectives, the claim is truthful. Different psychologists have taken different perspectives on single psychological issues, they have produced differing theories and carried out research from their chosen perspective in order to achieve the evidence required to support these claims. These differing perspectives may conflict, (where the contrasting claims of different perspectives are mutually exclusive and cannot be resolved). They may be complimentary (where contrasting claims are mutually compatible and can be accommodated within a common explanatory framework) or they may coexist (when particular perspectives, even in the same topic area, have no real point of contact: they neither conflict nor complement one another)(Cooper Roth 2007.) There are three perspectives involved in the research into language and meaning. These are evolutionary, social constructionist and cognitive. Evolutionary perspective investigates the influence of evolution on behavior; it looks at language as a characteristic that is obtained at species level and that evolution creates the meaning The evolutionary perspective concerns itself with the influence that evolution is believed to have had upon behavior. This perspective looks at language as a characteristic gained at species level, proposing that the meaning of language was created via evolution. The process of evolution has created linguistic ability and therefore the capacity for meaning to be applied to language. Scientific investigations into the study of animals have highlighted that language in humans are different in comparison to that of non-humans. Pinker and Bloom (1990) suggest that language has numerous reproductive advantages; it was also proposed that the social significance of language has had great impact on human evolution. Evolutionary psychologists recognize language as being uniquely human and dependent upon subtle and meaningful interactions with others, this exemplifies the evolutionary perspectives coexistence with the social constructionist perspective. Leading on, the social constructionist perspective looks at language as the way in which people, through social interactions with others, construct their world. This perspective has been evidenced via hermeneutic studies. It is also proposed that language and meaning plays as role in the pursuit of goals and purposes of everyday life (Cooper and Kaye 2007). This concept regarding the pursuit of goals is not unlike the idea proposed in evolutionary psychology; that there are evolutionary factors at play when advantageous adaptive characteristics are passed through generations. These perspectives together, demonstrate that in creation of meaning for individuals external factors are influential, thus demonstrating coexistence. Cognitive psychologists take a contrasting approach to language; their perspective is that of a information processing system within the person. A computational model is used to hypothesise the contribution of both bottom-up and top-down processing of information, which underlies the creation of meaning. Evidence in support of this is obtained though scientific experiments. The cognitive approach purports that meaning precedes language. Therefore communication is considered to be the transmission of meanings between individual speakers, in contrast the perspective adopted by social constructionists claim that meaning is created between people within the goals and purpose of the conversation, this is often disputed by the persons concerned (Cooper Kaye 2007). This demonstrates conflict within the cognitive and social constructionist perspectives. Conflicts can arise within a single perspective as illustrated by Pinker (2000) and Sperber (2000) (both cited by Cooper Kaye 2007), they offered differing explanations regarding views on language within the evolutionary perspective. Pinker proposed that cognitive abilities are built upon the foundation provided by language, however Sperber proposed that language was a by-product of information processing and these cognitive abilities came first (Cooper Kaye 2007).   It is these very conflicts that invite debates within psychology and provide the justification for additional research. Moving on the writer will now evaluate coexistence or conflict between the various studies conducted with regards to sex and gender. The perspectives used, to explore sex and gender, are psychoanalytic, social constructionist, biological and evolutionary perspectives. Again, these perspectives use different research methods and therefore produce differing theories, providing diverse accounts of sex and gender which enhances the complexity of evaluating whether they are complementary, in coexistence or conflict with each other (Hollway et al 2007). The introduction highlighted that perspectives are multidimensional; the dimensions of these perspectives that interrelate and are available for comparison are in no way limited to the theories created by each one. Focus is now placed upon the methodologies within the four perspectives mentioned and the corresponding nature vs. nurture debate to evaluate these perspectives relationships with each other. The perspective that explores the role nature plays in human experience and behavior is the biological and evolutionary. Scientific approaches examining genes and biological structures provide the evidence within this perspective. The Biological perspective proposes that there is an association with genetic and physiological aspects of sex with self-evident implications for gender. PET scanning techniques and the study of material data produced from this provides strength to the claims (Swaab Fliers (1985), Allen Gorski (1990), LeVay (1991), Cooke et al (1998), all cited by Hollway et al (2007), however when used in connection with behavioural and cognitive studies they may only be understood within the light of context and environmental influences (Cooper Roth 2007). Evolutionary psychologists take the view that reproductive stratagies have evolved differently between men and women, this can account for the difference in behavior and sexual attitude. Through experiments (Clark Hatfield (1989) and studies using questionnaires (Buss et al (1992), these claims have been evidenced, however the evidence does not discount other explanations for these behaviors (cited by Hollway et al 2007). The study carried out by Clark Hatfields is consistent with the evolutionary perspective, suggesting that behavior is passed through generations as genetically programmed, however the findings also support sexual behavior being influenced by cultural patterns and social pressure, therefore consistent with the social constructionist perspective (Hollway et al 2007). Both perspectives emphasise the influence of nature in human behavior demonstrating they are complimentary to one another, however they can also be considered to coexist as they both use a scientific method using systematic observation of phenomena under experimentation. The hermeneutic method is adopted by both the social constructionist and psychoanalytical approach directed by subjective data collection and analysis and the focus is on interpretation which is provided by a persons beliefs and experiences. The Psychoanalytic perspective recognizes the significance of biological dissimilarity along with the cultural and social meanings of these dissimilarities, and the social constuctionist perspectives explores the significance of culture and context in the construction of ideas about gender (Hollway et al 2007). The argument raised by the social constructionist is that gender is a product of culture rather than something which can be explained through biological sex status, thus conflicting with the general hypothesis raised by biological and evolutionary methodology and in contrast exhibits the   effect of nature on gender development. Historical and social context provide the framework for experience, behavior and knowledge regarding sex and gender in the social constructionist perspective, additionally discourse analysis has afforded support for gender-appropriate behaviours between girls and boys, in relation to school activities and subjects and toys (Haywood Mac an Ghaill (1996), cited by Hollway et al 2007). The psychodynamic perspective attempts to comprehend how girls and boys obtain a sexed and gendered sense of self, as they grow up, within the family context. This perspective acknowledges the significance of biological and societal accounts; an exemplar is exploring how a baby, sexed by its biology and gendered by society, acquires psychological gender that becomes fundamental to its later development as a person (Hollway et al 2007). Comparable with the social constructionist perspective, social discourses are assessed, accordingly the two perspectives are complementary as they both acquire understanding of experiences being gendered through the hermeneutic approach. It is however emphasized by Cooper Roth (2007) that psychoanalysis, unlike most other perspectives, is unable to validate its claims. Psychoanalysis is unique in recognizing the role of biological and social factors, consequently that nature and nurture are both equally significant within sex and gender, this could therefore lead to a complementary relationship or even so far as coexisting with all three other perspectives. Together these four perspectives, to differing extents, place significance upon biological and social factors which signifies them complementing one another. Due to the distinctiveness of the claims within each perspective however, an argument could be raised that the perspectives coexist as the differences are significant. In seeking an understanding of a topic such as those outlined in this assignment, various perspectives can be complementary as they all endeavor to elucidate phenomena. In conclusion there is a lot to be gained by studying a topic in psychology from more than one perspective as the propositions considered within psychology are multidimensional for example the theory; the methods and data used; the levels of analysis, and themes such as nature or nurture. Understanding topics such as language and meaning, or sex and gender, is enhanced by the wealth of information that the variety of perspectives offer. By studying a topic in psychology from more than one perspective and evaluating whether perspectives coexist, conflict or complement each other reinforces the dynamism and vibrancy of psychology.