Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7tmb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-30T19:16:51.865Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nomotics

The Science of Human Rule Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2024

Robert Hogan  and
Nancy Henley
Robert Hogan
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins University
Nancy Henley
Affiliation:
University of Maryland
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Several philosophers, psychologists, and sociologists have recently begun to reexamine the problem of explanation in social science. Instead of describing man in terms of organized traits, needs, drive-cathexes, coping and defense mechanisms, or self-actualizing tendencies, the new movement is concerned with “man as rule follower.” This paper outlines the essentials of such an approach (nomotics—from the Greek nomos, “law, convention”–refers to the study of human rule systems), beginning with an examination of four behavior systems which can be conceptualized as networks of rule-governed activities. We describe some key properties of rule systems, point out certain important differences in the manners in which they are used, and suggest methods for studying rule systems in general. We also present an analysis of the topic of obedience, a central factor in the operation and preservation of any given system.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , August 1970 , pp. 135 - 146
Copyright
Copyright © 1970 The Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

BERNE, E. (1964) Games People Play. New York: Grove.Google Scholar
BOURNE, L. (1966) Human Conceptual Behavior. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
BRAINE, M. D. S. (1963) “On learning the grammatical order of words.” Psych. Rev. 70 (July): 323–348.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
CHOMSKY, N. (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
CHOMSKY, N. (1959) “Review of Skinner's verbal behavior.” Language 35 (January-March): 26–58.Google Scholar
COLEMAN, J. S. (1968) “Games as vehicles for social theory.” Center for the Study of Social Organization of Schools. Report 21. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
DEESE, J. (1969a) “Behavior and fact.” Amer. Psychologist 24 (May): 515–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DEESE, J. (1969b) “Conceptual categories in the study of content.” Pp. 39–56 in Gerbner, G. et al. (eds.) Analysis of Communication Content. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
ESPER, E. A. (1925) “A technique for the experimental investigation of associative interference in artificial linguistic material.” Language Monographs 1 (November): 5–47.Google Scholar
FREUD, S. (1960) Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego. New York: Bantam.Google Scholar
GERT, B. (1968) The Moral Rules. Unpublished. Department of Philosophy, Dartmouth College.Google Scholar
GOFFMAN, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.Google Scholar
HART, H. L. A. (1961) The Concept of Law. Oxford, England: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
HOGAN, R. (forthcoming) “A dimension of moral judgment.” J. of Consulting and Clinical Psych.Google Scholar
HOGAN, R. (1969) “The development of an empathy scale.” J. of Consulting and Clinical Psych. 33 (June): 307–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
HUNT, E. B. (1962) Concept Learning. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
KIERKEGAARD, S. (1954) Fear and Trembling. Garden City, N.Y. Doubleday.Google Scholar
LEVI-STRAUSS, C. (1968) The Elementary Structure of Kinship. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
MACE, C. A. (1966) “Causal explanations in psychology,” Pp. 22–27 in Banks, C. and Broadhurst, P. L. (eds.) Studies in Psychology Presented to Cyril Burt. New York: Barnes & Noble.Google Scholar
MISCHEL, T. (1964) “Personal constructs, rules, and the logic of clinical activity.” Psych. Rev. 21 (May): 180–192.Google Scholar
PETERS, R. S. (1958) The Concept of Motivation. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
PIAGET, J. (1965) The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
POTTER, S. (1948) Gamesmanship. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
SCANDURA, J. (1968) “New directions for theory and research on rule learning. I. A set-function language.” Acta Psychologica 28 (November): 301–321.Google Scholar
STRAUSS, A. (1964) George Herbert Mead on Social Psychology. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
WITTGENSTEIN, L. (1953) Philosopical Investigations. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar