Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T09:41:28.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Use of Mathematics in Psychological Theory (Concluded from Previous Issue)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

J. F. Brown
J. F. Brown*
Affiliation:
University of Kansas
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The topological concepts allow us to assign individuals and goals to certain spatial regions. They allow us to designate what locomotions are possible for an individual and what regions must be traversed in attaining a definite goal. But the topological concepts alone tell us nothing of the actual locomotions performed in psychological activities. So far we have seen that the position of the individual at the start of the psychological activity may be defined in reference to this. Psychological activities may be ordered to locomotions. The individual in this sense has the character of a thing. The space through which the locomotion occurs has the properties of a medium. (Cf. Heider (10). In physical problems where the field construct is used, one may make this same distinction. Bodies falling in the earth’s gravitational field have the properties of things, while the atmosphere is to be characterized as a medium. Similarly in the electro-static field, the isolated conductors have the properties of things and the field has those of a medium.

Type
Original Paper
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 1 , Issue 2 , June 1936 , pp. 7 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © 1936 The Psychometric Society

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.)

Footnotes

*

Such dynamic terms have been frequently used by some sociologists and psychologists, usually without precise definition and without the realization that they represent theoretical constructs. It is houed that the field-theoretical concepts will not be confused with these others.

References

VII Bibliography

Brown, J. F. A methodological consideration of the problem of psychometrics. Erkenntnis, 1934, 4, 46–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. F. Freud and the scientific method. Phil. of Science, 1934, 1, 323–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. F.and Towards a theory of social dynamics. Jl. of Soc. Psych., (in print).Google Scholar
Brown, J. F.and Fedar, D. D.Thorndike's theory of learning as gestalt psychology. Psychol. Bull., 1934, 31, 426–437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, N. R. Physics: The Elements, Cambridge: University Press, 1920.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. Die physikalische Sprache als Universalsprache der der Wissenschaft. Erkenntnis, 1931, 2, 432–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, R. Psychologie in physikalischer Sprache. Erkenntnis, 1932, 3, 107–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraenkel, A. Einleitung in die Mengenlehre, Berlin: Julius Springer, 1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franklin, P.What is topology?. Phil. of Sci., 1935, 2, 39–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heider, F. Ding und Medium. Symposium, 1926, I, 109 ff.Google Scholar
Hull, C. The concept of the habit, family hierarchy and maze learning. Psychol. Rev., 1934, 42, 35–52.Google Scholar
Kerékjártó, B. Vorlesungen über Topologie. I,Flachentopologie, Berlin: Julius Springer, 1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewin, K.The conflict between Aristotelian and Galilean modes of thought in psychology. Jl. Gen. Psych., 1931, 5, 141–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewin, K. Die Grundlagen der dynamischen Psychologie. (To be published, 1935.).Google Scholar
Lewin, K. Der Richtungsbegriff in der Psychologie. Psychol. Forsch., 1934, 19, 250–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewin, K. A dynamic theory of personality, New York: McGraw-Hill, 1935.Google Scholar
Poincaré, H. Analysis Situs. Journal de l'Ec. Pol., 1895, II, 1–121.Google Scholar
Riemann, B.In Weyl, H.(Eds.), Über die Hypothesen, welche der Geometrie zu Grunde liegen, Berlin: Julius Springer, 1923.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. The measurement of intelligence. New York, 1927.Google Scholar
Tolman, E. C. Brunswik, E. The organism and the causal texture of the environment. Psychol. Rev., 1935, 42, 43–77.Google Scholar