John Watson’s science
Date
2010
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
University of Delaware
Abstract
Psychology has always been concerned with its status as a scientific discipline. This concern was among the factors motivating John Watson (1878 – 1958) to found behaviorism as a replacement for the introspective studies of consciousness which then dominated psychology. Watson saw introspection as an unscientific methodology which had held psychology back from achieving its status as a respected natural science. This call towards the scientific was popular in American psychology, and behaviorism became dominant in American psychology until about the 1950s and 1960s, when the study of consciousness (although using different methods) again became popular. Even psychology after this ‗cognitive revolution‘ is influenced by behaviorism. As an aid to understanding Watson‘s science, historical context is provided by a brief discussion of the history of science and a more in-depth analysis of William James‘ Principles of Psychology. Time is also given to some brief comments on the nature of science and Thomas Kuhn‘s paradigms.
While John Watson was adamant in his belief that behaviorism was scientific and introspection was not, he was not always specific about what exact qualities were necessary for a science. An analysis of his writings indicates that he viewed reproducible results, objective and precise measurements (preferably obtained with instruments), shared definitions, and end goals of prediction and control as key aspects of a science. Watson stressed the practical applications of his behavior psychology in both his academic and popular writings. Behaviorism‘s focus was on understanding humans in order to better to predict and control their behavior for the good of both individuals and society. This work proposes that Watson‘s insistence on achieving recognition for psychology as a natural science and his goals of prediction and control are related. Behavioral psychology had practical applications, but would not be allowed to practice those applications unless psychology was recognized and respected as a legitimate science. Without that respect and recognition, psychologists would not be permitted to help design and guide the reshaping of society.