Most influential psychologist

greenspun.com : LUSENET : History & Theory of Psychology : One Thread

Who would be your candidate for the most influential psychologist of all time?

-- j (jeadam@ucalgary.ca), April 08, 2003

Answers

Leonard Zusne, in Names in the History of Psychology (Halsted/John Wiley, 1975) reports on one research project trying to do that. 526 psychologists are rated there, with scores ranging from 11 to 27 to indicate their level of significance. You'll find various psychologists tying with ratings of 27. Similar projects have been completed more recently. You'll find an article about the 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century at http://www.apa.org/journals/gpr/press_releases/june_2002/gpr62139.pdf

-- Hendrika Vande Kemp (hendrika@earthlink.net), April 08, 2003.

Off the top of my head, I will take a crack at this question. I would list the most influental "psychologists" in the following order. 1. Charles Darwin (evolutionary thinking applied to humans and animals. 2. Sigmund Freud (psychological theories of psychopathology, psychoanalytic treatment, unconscious processes, emphasis on emotional and motivational conflicts) 3. Abraham Maslow (humanistic and transpersonal psychology principles like self-actualization, peak-experiences, hierarchy of needs, and a precursor to modern positive psychology) 4. B.F.Skinner (showed the value of objective analysis of molar behavior, rate of responding measures, power of external reinforcement, elusidating schedules of reinforment) 5. Carl Rogers (client-centered therapy, self-realization, unconditional positive regard/a precursor to modern positive psychology) 6. Numerous contributors to physiological psychology and health psychology, like Donald Hebb, Olds & Milner, Hubel & Weisel. 7. Numerous contributors in developmental, social psychology and cross-cultural psychology, like Piaget and Kurt Lewin. 8. Numerous contributors to cognitive psychology, psycholinguistics, imformation processing, like Neisser, Chomsky, and Herbert Simon.

There seems to be a crude, but not unexpected pattern, that the earlier the contribution and the more it was theoretical as opposed to empirical, the more it has had to be discarded (at least temporarily) or modified. Never-the-less, many early theories were very important heuristically, even sometimes when they were mostly incorrect(e.g., phenology).

-- Paul R. Kleinginna (prklein@gsvms2.cc.gasou.edu), April 11, 2003.


Could Darwin be considered a psychologist? Would anyone involved in psychology before the designation of the field be considered a psychologist?

-- (jeadam@ucalgary.ca), April 12, 2003.

I don't think that Darwin would normally be considerd to have been a psychologist, but few figures have had as much influence on psychology as Darwin has. Without Darwin, there would have been no school of American Functionalism, and without functionalism, it is doubtful there would have been a behaviorism either. Consider also Darwin's book, _Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals_, as well as his article, "A biographical sketch of an infant. (1877, Mind, 2, 285-294).

-- Christopher Green (cgreen@chass.utoronto.ca), April 12, 2003.

I realize that Charles Darwin did his work before there were acedemic departments or degrees in psychology, and that many might justifiably not consider him a psychologist. However, I would like to make the case it might be just as appropriate to consider early (i.e., over 150 years ago) significant contributors to psychology to be psychologists, because this is what they did, even though it was before psychology as a discipline and they probably did not call themselves psychologists. For example, Darwin did develop some useful psychological theories, wrote a book on animal and human emotions, and I think did some early survey and observational research in the area of emotion. Because psychology as a discipline was relatively late in history, many people prior to the discipline had to make their psychological contributions in some other profession or way. There is even a problem defining a psychologist today in terms of their formal training or title, as oppose to what they contribute. For example, a number of the important contemporary contributors to psychology were not specifically trained as psychologists. For example, the following "nonpsychologists" got Nobel Prizes in part for psychological contributions: Konrad Lorenz, Niko Tinbergen, Karl von Fritsh, Roger Sperry, David Hubel, Torsten Weisel, and Herbert Simon. Today psychology, and science in general, is to a large degree interdisciplinary in practice and attitude, so what is wrong if some psychological historians are more flexible and call very early contributors to psychology "psychologists". As psychological historians, we could point out if the "psychologist" was before a formal disciple in psychology, what they considered themselves to be, and what their contemporaries thought they were. Interestingly, I think for much of William James' career he did not consider himself a psychologist! Needless to say, a psychological historian would probably want to draw some limits on who they called a "psychologist".

-- Paul R. Kleinginna (prklein@gsvms2.cc.gasou.edu), April 15, 2003.


The most influencial psychologist of all time is B.F. Skinner. What Darwin is for biology is Skinner for psychology: unimaginable. By designing an apparatus for measuring and changing the behavior of organisms he was able to discover laws of behavior, most importantly the elements of stimulus control and the influence of consequences (rewards and punishments) on behavior. Although there were other great psychologists, like client-centered therapist Carl Rogers and hypnotherapist Milton Erickson, they were artists, not scientists. Their work cannot be replicated, Skinners work can. Therefore he is the most influencial and he will be even more as time passes. Especially his work on verbal behavior will be more appreciated in time.

Marius Rietdijk Faculty of Business and Economics Free University Amsterdam

-- Marius Rietdijk (mrietdijk@feweb.vu.nl), July 17, 2004.


Nice advertisement. We now return you to your regularly scheduled program.

-- Christopher Green (cgreen@chass.utoronto.ca), July 17, 2004.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ