Student 2:
1. "He had a sense of humor, tried to keep the class attentive, had a rest
period and he gave us food."
2. "Collecting the data was fun, writing & typing it up wasn't."
4. "How to write a paper on the individual's Daily Round."

Student 3:
1. "I liked his open (most of the time) attitude and the grading system. "
2. "I didn't like the workbook which is not clearly written (i.e., not
understandable for most students)."
4. "Knowledge that I can write a research report. "
(Note: In 2 above, the student is referring to the text used last semester, not
this present one: see Workbook for the Study of Social Psychology, 2nd
Edition, 1978, available in library. )

Student 4:
1. "I liked having the daily feedback sheets. I think it helped the students
and the instructor. "
2. "I disliked the instructor's way of informing us about our first RR. He
should have presented and outlined this project first, before assigning it.
It appeared as if he had to change certain instructions after we the students,
attempted doing it."
4. "I have gained a certain insight and awareness in seeing & meeting people
and understanding more of my actions as well as theirs. "
Student 5:
1. "Jakobovits' unique way of teaching the course. It was relaxing and not
rigid. He made me feel comfortable."
2. "I didn't care for the book. It did not give a good enough explanation of
what was to be done & it was hard to find the pages of my interest.
Jakobovits sometimes talked nonsense & did not relate to the course
4. "I gained a new perspective of learning & writing out research reports.
I've also learned that every individual is unique & has his own opinion. "
Student 6:
1. "His flexibility to the students & course on the whole. The break
(stretching). Feedback sheets--an excellent way of keeping in touch
(feelings, opinions) w/instructor instead of waiting to let it out all at
the end. "
2. "Often times I would get more confused when the instructor would be giving
us explanations, information on how to attempt our projects."
4. "Ethnodynamics Daily Round. A deeper understanding of the community
& our own community connections. "
Student 7:
1. "The flexibility, dedication of the instructor. The attentiveness to the
students' needs and abilities. I enjoyed putting and viewing my life in an
organized way. "

2. "Sometimes he was a little abstract in thought, but he would always
clear things up at a later date."
4. "A lot. I feel I have a "feel" for Soc. Psych. The way in which the
course was structured was innovative and interesting. I have a new
perspective on my life and way of looking at things. "
Student 8:
1. "Instructor: flexibility, communication with students, teaching in a
different manner. Course: learning about how people "tick" in a real
situation, rather than reviews in a book."
2. "At times, experienced some confusion of what was actually wanted. "
4. "Learning what is going on in other people's head. Why they react the
way they do; and how they all come together to form a community. "
Student 9:
1. "Grading system, where you know beforehand how you can get an A
and from there you go after it. I like the idea of earning points for doing
certain activities--not so much from tests or exams. "
2. "The- confusion of book numbers (pages)."
4. "I have learned some of the aspects of social psychology which I never
knew before--in fact a lot of new things. I have learned to be more
aware of myself and the area I live in--more aware of life itself. "
Student 10:
1. "Teacher & student interaction, teacher cares for subject. "
2. "Not being clear in assignments, very vague at times, should have
handout that explains exactly what is wanted."
4. "Understanding of social interaction and relations. "

Note the differences in the information value between the subjective- summative reports (as discussed above with forms J-14 and MIDI) and these summative-witnessing reports. The purpose of the former is to generate a quantitative value which is norm referenced. This works well for the political function in that it yields an exact count of students' votes. The Instructional Critique Sheet, on the other hand, is not quantitatively transformed: no computer run is made (How? ?). Its official purpose is to provide the instructor with student "comments" in a "natural language" and "in place of a 'rigid quantitative format"' (AEO letter to instructors, May 17, 1978).
Note the fact that students addressed their comments to administrative officials rather than directly to the instructor. The comments served a useful diagnostic purpose and were used to affect changes in the course this semester. The following is a summary of the information retained from these comments:
(a) Retain flexibility concerning due dates for student assignments.
(b) Avoid giving the impression of impatience with student questions.
(c) Retain features involving rest break, stretching exercises, sharing of
food, use of daily feedback form.
d) Reduce amount of typing required. Switch to the use of forms.

(e) Retain grading system for rewarding multiple activities.
(f) Change text.
(g) Prepare written instructions for all assignments.
(h) Retain focus of course on self and community.
The second example includes sample comments from students of Psych 222, Fall 1976 semester. These comments were given anonymously in response to the instructor's request at the end of the semester. Thus it was an "internal" evaluation rather than official or "external."


The students gave a total of 256 responses. These were arranged by number and typed up. Two pages of this are presented below.

22. "I felt that through the exercise I have overcome an old hang-up."
23. "I've told my friend to try the exercise."
24. "As far as our assignments in this class were concerned, I first found
them to be 'not worth doing or not challenging' but after doing them, I
feel that I got some thing out of them."
25. "I didn't like the fact that I was not given any feedback about how I did
on the assignments. "
26. "Having the opportunity to look at other people's assignments helped me to
see if I had done the assignment correctly according to the majority of the
people's papers that I read. "
27. "Basically, I liked the class, especially the different types of
assignments given. "
28. "I was surprised to find out that in a large lecture hall, there can be
discussion of some sort. "
29. "As informal as the setting was, I found this environment conducive to
the learning of social psychology. "
30. "I found many of the social behaviors that were brought up in class to be
very interesting. . . "
31. "I felt uneasy without a syllabus to guide in some direction. "
32. "I found the professor capable, and stimulating to the class. He
encouraged participation and was open to students' comments. "
33. "The professor made people think for themselves, rather than having
all the answers given to them. "
62. "The professor probably could use more audio-visual material (films,
slides, etc. ) in teaching this course . "
63. "There were times (in class) that I was totally lost. "
64. "I was not aware of the amount of talk that occurs in a day. "
65. "He should explain it (color code) in simple terms then expand outward.
66."After I did this assignment I started realizing that to understand social
psychology I had to begin to understand myself first. "
67. "Reading over my report I can say that most of my behavior is dictated
by the social setting I'm in. "

68. "It made me think of things I've never thought of before. "
69. "It showed me how social settings influence the topics of conversation. "
70. "It helped me analyze behavior objectively, not only mine but those of
others. "
71. "Some of the assignments are ambiguous. "
72. "Some of the assignTnents we do are time consuming. "
73. "I wouldn't consider this course easy, you must work to get an A. "
74. "You can apply the color coding system to everything we learned or will
learn in life. "
75. "Dr. Jakobovits uses a lot of words that require the use of a dictionary. "

Note once again that students appear to address their comments to an "outside" evaluator despite the fact that the comments were requested by the instructor. It is apparently difficult for students to address "critique" comments directly to their instructor. We would like to show you sample comments given by students under a situational circumstance which made it mandatory or natural to address comments to the instructor. These are the Daily Feedback Forms which students fill out after each class throughout the semester. The official purpose of the feedback form is to address comments directly to the instructor. In addition to the verbal comment, students also gave a quantitative-summative assessment of the class in percentage terms, with 100% being top rating. The percentages given by the student on that day is quoted here in parentheses at the end of the verbal comment. The ratings refer to:
Degree of Your Preparation for this Lecture;
Degree of Your Comprehension for this Lecture;
Degree of Your Satisfaction with this Lecture;
Degree of Intrinsic Interest of this Lecture.

(one student)

(9/8/77; L.2) "Dr. Jakobovits seems a very humorous and interesting man.
Course alternative looks good as compared to the lecture-exam format,
commonly used. Could be a rewarding semester. (0, 100, 90, 90)

*(9/15/77; L.4) "Your lecture material is related, except at times I can't see
how. I feel at times I'm only being given pieces of the whole. " (95, 90, 85, 75)

(9/22/77; L.X) "Alright! This method of explaining the charts like you did today
is very, very, very good. I really was able to understand the charts we went
over. Keep it up! Your lecture today was excellent. I am not confused today as
I usually am w/the other previous lecturer. Keep it up. I'm sure more people
understood today's lecture." (100, 99, 100, 80)

*(10/6/77; L.XX) "Very interesting to hear other reports and your comments
on them. Dr., how will we know if we did Research Reports to your satisfaction?
(. . . ) Please answer at next lecture, and answer the questions straightforward.

Don't give any elaborate offshoot answer. You are a very enjoyable professor, but sometimes you answer a question by going around it. In essence you don't answer it for my satisfaction. So if I asked you: "Dr., do you own a car?" A straightforward answer for me would be, "Yes, I do own a car, " nothing else. So we asked, how do we know if the Research Reports are satisfactory? You might say, "Come by to my office and I will let you know. " (100, 95, 95, 85)

(11/13/77; L. 18) "Too Bad Some People Gotta talk and slow you down in class."
(99, 98, 89, 95)

(12/1/77) "I feel that I have done a lot of work for this course as shown by my folder. I have not missed any class session and feel that my efforts were very worthwhile and informative. I feel I have learned a lot and would take pride m my folder of work. Grade prediction: A. " (99, 100, 100, 100)

(one student)

*(9/15/77; L. 4) "Too much information at one time is too hard to digest. "
(60, 5, 20, 80)

(10/14/77; L. 9) "Please explain Research Reports 2 & 3 in more detail. #2 is due next Thursday. " (0, 10, 10, 10)

*(10/6/77; L. 10) "I think the reports were generally well-done when compared to mine. They were of high quality and very interesting insights. I would like to look at them for they would tell me about how others feel and simultaneously get the same feeling, i.e., their thoughts are just like mine." (0, 60, 70, 85)

(10/18/77; L. 13) "R. R. #3 explanation was short and exact to the point. Very good, very understandable. All other future explanations should be short and explicit to the point." (100, 86, 92, 83)

(11/22/77; L. 23) "I applaud you for telling the freshman group sitting in the last row to shut up. They were really distracting. Congratulations on your good deed ! " (90, 85, 100, 92)

You no doubt sense an immediate difference between the comments in Examples 3a, 3b and those in Examples 1 and 2. First, the comments are clearly addressed to the instructor (except for (9/8/77; L.2) in Example 3a). Second, the comments are specific to a particular situation or event in class. Third, there is a clear impression of continuity over the lectures on the part of the student. This affords a longitudinal perspective (or sometimes called "formative evaluations"). Fourth, interpersonal differences (or individual variation) are notable both as a whole, longitudinally, and for a particular lecture. For instance, the two views on L. 4 (9/15/77) complement each other and the suggestion emerges that the problem student (3a) was having, is diagnosed by student (3b). Similarly, the comments on L. 10 (10/6/77) strengthen each other. As well particular themes become noticeable across the lectures and across the students, as for instance the need for better instructions regarding research reports.

In Example 4 below, we present annotations students wrote towards the end of the semester while reviewing their folder containing the Daily Feedback Forms they filled out after each class. We were particularly interested in establishing the meaning (or functional value) of the quantitative percentage ratings given for each lecture. For instance, if two students give a rating of "80%" for the same lecture do they mean the same thing by that number? Students gathered in groups of three and discussed how to best solve this issue. They then wrote a report on their solution. We quote from three samples. The Daily Feedback Form contained four percentage ratings:
Quantitative personal rating for overall
- professor factors _____%
- administration factors _____%
- student factors _____%
- self factors _____%

(Psych 397; Spring 1978)
Sample 1 (three students)

"II. Preparation of Graphs
Each feedback sheet category was standardized separately for each student. For professor factors we equated the lowest percentage each student said he would give for that category to zero. The highest percentage each student said he would five for professor factors was made equal to one hundred. The score each would give on an average day was made equal to fifty. This was repeated for the other three categories resulting in the table below.

"Standardized ScoresStudents

5080 8080

5090 9080


This type of annotation clarifies the individual meaning of the rating given by a student. Note for instance that a rating of "80%" for professor factors is only about average, and for student C, way below average. How would the instructor have known this ? It is clear that quantitative data by themselves are open to uncertain interpretations. The procedure of investigative annotation, as exemplified here, adds information essential for valid interpretation.
In this next example, one student went over the comments (or absence of them) on her Daily Feedback Form, and added retrospective comments.

(Psych 397; Spring 1978)
(2/21/78; L. 9)
DFF comment: "Time seemed to pass quickly today.
DFF ratings: 100%; 80%; 100%; 100%
Retrospective comment: "This lecture was easy to understand. I was
satisfied with it because we did review some of the vocabulary from the quiz. "

(2/28/78; L. 11)
DFF comment: none.
DFF ratings: 100%; 80%; 100%; 100%
Retrospective comment: "Interesting lecture, good explanations of new material, but I didn't feel like writing anything on the DFF. I was still thinking about the lecture, and not everything was clear to me because it was new material, so I decided to wait and see."

(3/7/78; L.13)
DFF comment:
"'I didn't realize it would take me so long to type the
reports'; 'This assignmentis so complicated!' (listing
people in categories); 'Well, that's interesting' (looking
over finished reports). Question: Was there any special
reason for your picking out that particular paper to read
from ("My Talk") ? (My transcript)."
DFF ratings100%; 80%; 100%; 100%
Retrospective comment: "There are a lot of things I say to myself about this class, and so I wrote down the first three that came to my mind. I guess that from these comments, I realize that the course requires a lot of hard work, but that the finished reports are interesting. I also asked the question if you had any reason to read my transcript. I was wondering if you had any reason for picking it out, or if it was random, or maybe you were trying to pick on me. I was feeling picked on earlier in the day and I guess I felt the same was happening. "

(Psych 397; Spring 1978)

(2/16/78; L. 8)
DFF comment: "Beginning to understand this course a little more."
DFF ratings: 85%; 80%; 80%; 85%
Retrospective comment: "The prof. began discussing the concepts, of this course in more detail, which led to an improvement in my understanding of the course."

(2/23/78; L. 10)
DFF comment:
"I've tried to make some sense out of my transcript.
Am I getting the right end of the stick? . . . A transcript
seems to be a more detailed version of a theatrical play.
Is it?"
DFF ratings: 85%; 80%; 80%; 80%
Retrospective comment: "The stresses on stage direction, tone of voice, etc. gave me the idea that a transcript was a detailed written form of a theatrical play."

(2/28/78; L. 11)
DFF comment: "Hoping to receive my transcript back soon. "
DFF ratings: 90%; 85%; 80%; 80%
Retrospective comment: "Having handed my transcript in last week, I was hoping to receive it back today."

(3/7/78; L. 13)
DFF comment:
"Getting slightly confused again. Perhaps some reading
will help. "
DFF ratings: 85%; 80%; 80%; 80%
Retrospective comment: "I had not as yet fully understood the details of my last assignment. The professor was going on to new material which I could not comprehend for it was based on the material covered in the previous assignment.

(3/9/78; L. 14)
DFF comment:
"In my opinion, I feel, that to many students, your
approach is somewhat revolutionary.... in the sense
that the requirements are not laid out in black and white,
and are not of paramount importance. Also, many see
no practical use for Soc. Psy. yet. As soon as they do
(and you may help) interest will increase and imagined
confusion will dis appear, I hope ! "
DFF ratings: 90%; 80%; 80%; 80%
Retrospective comment: "The general attitude of the class was fast deteriorating and the professor indulged in a kind of a pep-talk and was hoping to regenerate interest into the class. His new approach to studying methods was obviously going to take time to be accepted and absorbed by students."

The examples we have given thus far regarding summative-witnessing reports have all been occasioned within a context of critical evaluation. The student is asked to critique and assess his experiences in class, and then, annotates the assessment in different ways, depending on instructions. In Examples 5a, 5b, below, the occasioning circumstance for the annotation was the instructor's request to students to write "survival tips" for the future student taking the course who would be reading them at the beginning of the semester by way of orientation. What do these comments look like ? We call this form, a Student Discharge Report and contains additional information not reviewed here.

(Psych 397; Fall 1977)
Sample 1
December 13, 1977

Dear Future Psychology 397 students:
I would like to take this opportunity to introduce to you, Psychology 397 course along with Dr. Leon Jakobovits and his colleague Dr. Barbara Gordon.
I first enrolled in Dr. Jakobovits' Psychology 322 course in the Spring '77 semester (now Psychology 222) and onto Psychology 397.
The Psychology 397 course is an informal, casual structured class. There were three assignments-- 1) Daily Round Activity cataloguing, 2) Daily Feedback Sheets for 4 of our other courses for 5 consecutive classes and 3) A follow-up of assignment #2 pertaining to re-evaluating and analyzing our feedback sheets from questions specifically asked by Dr. Jakobovits.
I've learned a great deal about myself in social situations by doing the assignments as well as, participating and analyzing raw data from fellow class members and from Dr. Jakobovits' Psychology 222 course. By doing the assignment, I've found out many interesting and intriguing information of my classes that I would've never viewed just by going to class and doing the assignments. By doing it brought me aware of everything involved.
Many of Dr. Jakobovits' lectures are interesting-- pro or con is an individual opinion, sometimes controversial but he allowed opinions and comments from his students. Most of the information was "common sense" but gave us an in-depth information, some information was something that had to be told and arised thought to some individuals. Dr. Gordon helped along, too. Sometimes she had different views from Dr. Jakobovits. But, all in all, it always turned out with a compromise at the end.
I've enjoyed Psychology 397--it's a different class experience, I hope that you'll enjoy that class, too.

Sample 2

Things You should know about the course
Psycholinguistics is basically studying the relationship between the person, the setting, and his interior dialogue. Because there is no information on it, except what has been building up in Dr. Jakobovits' archives, you will be studying the relationships through you [sic] own research.
I thought the research projects were very interesting, because it caused me great insight. I really mean IN-sight. I became more aware of what was going on with myself.

Things you should know about Dr. Jakobovits
To me, Dr. Jakobovits is enlightened. I tried to absorb all I could from him, but I let conspiracies keep me from talking to him outside class. But even through the short class sessions with him brought great improvement in the quality of my life.

Sample 3
I don't want this to sound like a bullshit letter because I have something to say. I know a lot of you are taking this course because you heard it was a guaranteed A. I am not talking to you. For those of you who are interested or even curious about what Dr. Jakobovits and Dr. Gordon are trying to do, I hope you will try to understand that this is a revolutionary way to learn Social Psychology. Don't condemn what you don't understand. Contrary to what some students say, it IS the study of social psychology--personalized. It is the study of YOU and how you function in your environment. It is the answer to every student's gripe that college courses are not geared toward relevancy in our everyday lives. Admittedly Dr. J. and Dr. G. have not always assigned reports that are helpful to me in my life (although some have been helpful and interesting to me), but help him out in this respect. You will never have a teacher more open to suggestions and feedback--talk to him about the kinds of assignments that would be helpful to you in your life. For instance, a study I did was to find out (if I could) why I got sleepy in some classes on some days and not on others. I suppose it is those reports that are irrelevant that cause students to come down so hard on this course, but that leads me to what I want to say:
Dr. J. never explains it in so many words, but he is at the brink of a revolution in psychology. I know it may sound a little far-fetched, but that's what they said about the Wright brothers--to be trite. At the moment he is without funds, but someday someone is going to believe in him and then things are going to start happening. Dr. J. knows that he is onto something big, but I don't think he is quite sure yet of what it is. (Now remember, these are my impressions; I have never spoken to him about it. ) The reason I don't think he is sure yet is because of the constant change in his class format and the assignments-- he is always trying out new things hoping to stumble onto that big breakthrough. He has his methodology all worked out--what is missing is a purpose for all this data that will make it obvious to everyone how useful it all is.
This class is notorious for being incomprehensible. You will find your- self sitting there in class, listening to Dr. J. and you won't understand a word he is saying. It is a mental block. The trick is concentration. Don't just listen to the words. If you concentrate on what he is SAYING, you will realize that he is merely saying something you already know in another way. He has taken words we already know and given them a new meaning to fit into his methodology. We are still trying to understand what he is saying by using the old definitions we always knew. The class is revolutionary and many have said that the man is either a genius or completely nuts.

Now there are some of you who will think that this is all well and fine, but what good is it to me now? The finished product may revolutionize psychology, but give it to me then--not now. This is fine, but I hope there are some of you who will be willing to get involved in working with this idea in its early stages. Then you can say you worked on it way back when . . .

Sample 4
To the student of Psychology 397:
As a psychology major I entered this class hoping to expand my under- standing of the field, but mostly to fill a requirement as probably many of you are doing. What I have left with is a basic knowledge of social psychology and its diversity from the other branches of psychology. But more importantly, I have gained a better understanding of myself, the professors, students, and people in general. What scared me at first was this class' diversity of peoples, professors and students, having been used to only local people. I now have a greater respect and understanding of people different from me and the knowledge that we are pretty much the same. Professor Jakobovits' terms of ethnicity, standardized imaginings, daily round, etc., are very meaningful to me now and I have a greater awareness of how these factors surround and affect our lives. In teaching this course, Professor Jakobovits helped to achieve a more socially woven group by having group discussions and interactions; this helps to eliminate the alienation you can feel in larger lecture classes. But, the one aspect of Professor Jakobovits and his associates that has left the biggest impression upon me is their efforts, studies and methods in developing a more idealistic society, whether it is a small class or a major city like Honolulu. Although I feel this overview of the objectives of this class is too advanced to achieve, I can appreciate the efEort and feel it is a step in the right direction. Perhaps, it isn't even consciously realized by anybody else but me. But it does prove that if there are a hundred students in this class, there will be a hundred different interpretations of what is to be gained from it.
I have taken both Psy 222 and 397 and was surprised to find how different the two were, as to methods of teaching and learning. You can be sure that each and every new semester will hold more surprises for the student of social psychology, as the course of people and the subject keep changing. I have only the deepest regard for the instructors and hope you can come to appreciate them like I have, in your own way.
Good luck!

Sample 5
An Open Letter to the New 397 student

During your first few weeks in this class, listen carefully. Don't be afraid to ask questions about anything you don't understand. No matter whether the question is about class structure, nature of the grading, requirements or class subject lectures.

Also, don't be afraid to offer your own ideas on what the professor is saying, and feel free to even openly disagree with him.
Naturally the class sessions 'open-up' after people get to know each other, and feel more comfortable, but it is important that you make an effort to speak up. It makes the class and topic much more interesting, and you'll learn more.

Sample 6
Psychology 397: Message to Student
This class will offer to you a whole new learning experience. The atmosphere of the class is different from others and the method of teaching by the instructor will also be different.
You can learn a lot out of this class if you are willing to learn and if you make a sincere effort to learn. Listen carefully to what the instructor has to say for he will present ideas to you which will make you realize things that you have not bothered to notice before.
The exercises (or what will be known as research reports) will only be hard if you let it be hard. When you get an assignment, don't dive into it right away. Take the time to sit and gather up your thoughts. At first the assignment may seem hard to interpret, but with a little thinking on your part the ideas should come flowing in. All it takes is a little concentration and patience.
A lot of the papers will look different for these papers require students to interpret information according to the way they think and feel. And everyone has their own way of thinking so interpretation of information will not be the same from one student to the next.
Reading other student's research reports can also be interesting for you will be able to see how these students feel about certain things. You can also get an idea of the personality differences found between different people.
As I have said before, this class can be a good learning experience if you want it to be. If you put enough effort into the class and think about the information the instructor has given you, this course can be very worthwhile and meaningful for you.

There is a verve and enthusiasm in these "letters" that are quite striking. It is clear that this kind of situational circumstance occasions a very different type of witnessing report. One can view evaluations from the point of view of the extent to which the occasioning circumstance "prompts" the content of the evaluations. Thus, with computer scored quantitative forms (e.g., J-14, MIDI), the prompting is maximal, i. e., the content of your answer is completely determined --all you do is circle a number. With qualitative comments and annotations, the general content is restricted by the format or the question, but the specific con- tent is supplied by the respondent. Finally, with Student Discharge Reports, the general content, as well as the specific, is supplied by the respondent.

The last category to be considered consists of comments students made in their research reports, usually in the conclusion section. These annotations were given under minimal prompting conditions since the instructor did not request them. Rather, they appear to be spontaneous comments in response to the student's own involvement with the research report. Here are some samples.

(Psych 222; Spring 1978)

Sample 1
"For this semester, from taking this psychology course, I have learned to better appreciate the topic of psychology and I feel it has helped me to under- stand other people and myself a lot better. For now I realize that there are no right answers written for you to look up in the library. The right answers are found only from studying a community, from studying the ethnodynamic forces that control them and making a logical conclusion from this. This is what my Research Report #2 is all about--studying to look for answers."

Sample 2
"I did not find any abstracts which pertained to our research reports. I think our research reports are something unique and our study of the daily round is new to the world. This may be the reason why we are having so many difficulties in this course in writing our research reports. It is so new and unique that there are no models to follow and perfection can only be reached through trials and errors during the semesters that follow. "

Sample 3
"I feel that the research reports have helped me in getting clear in mind these differences in method. But more than this, it has made me a participating member of the class rather than a passive member. This is a differing view from what I am used to because I have to become more responsible for my actions. If I don't hand in RR#1 it affects not only my grades but the rest of the community. RR#1 is useless if nobody reads it. In this respect, I have an obligation to myself and to the community. "

Sample 4
"Using this witnessing approach and our Research Reports, the members of the class were able to actively participate in the course, rather than passively receiving information through the instructor's lectures. The class became a 'community' in the sense that through recording and analyzing our daily rounds and other students', we were able to relate to each other more personally in such a huge class. Through the 'structure' and utilization of CCPs (Community Cataloging Practices) we were able to keep records of the activities of the community by each individual member, following the instructions of the professor with regard to the general prescribed formats of our Research Reports. "

Sample 5
"All of these tasks involve the observations and the understandings we come to, based on the externalizations of others. In this research report, I became more aware of how much I depend on my first impressions and observations to guide my behavior. Research Report #2 brings awareness because it is structured in such a way in which to allow the researcher (student) to be able to contrast the way he feels things are supposed to be (first impressions), with the way that things actually are represented (in the research data--Research Report #1). Research Report #2 allows us to objectify the data which we gathered for Research Report #1, and set the basis for the understanding of social psychology within a community. "

Sample 6
"The findings discussed in this report and their relevancy to the field of Social Psychology can give us scientific knowledge of people. The availability of the Daily Round Archives, has enabled the students of Social Psychology to review the Community Cataloging Practices (CCP's) of others and establish a sense of objectivity when dealing with others. These discoveries of human interaction in society are of value in terms of knowledge of people, not as sensory apparatuses or as organisms or as parts of cultures--but as people living and interacting with other people. The influences which each share and in in turn are influenced by are also the characteristics of essential elements which compose the field of Social Psychology. Therefore, whenever people are affected by problems, Social Psychology should be used as a relevant force in obtaining an essential solution. Through the type of practice and understanding of the field a better comprehension of interrelated interactions of social occasions can be made. "

Once again we see how the context which occasions the evaluative comments has a definitive effect on the content. Here, within the context of the Research Report, the student achieves a professional level of objectivity. It is his personal achievement, the culmination of his study, work, and understanding. It is a far cry from the stilted, constraining responses he gives under the context of an evaluative rating form or prompted critique sheet. The following diagram contrasts the various summative-reports discussed in this section in terms of their context for "prompting."

Synopsis 21: Psychodynamics - 2: Evaluation/Assessment
Evaluation or assessment are two equivalent terms and represent the second component of psychodynamics (attribution and judgment being the first and third respectively). Formal evaluation procedures are commonly used in a community to assess the quality of a tool, service, or on-going procedure. Informal evaluations are quite common on one's daily round--witness the frequency with which one can hear ourselves and others use evaluative assertions such as "this is very pleasant," or, "you are extremely rude," or, "I like this a lot," etc.
A formal evaluation technique is often used in education and training in order to assess the degree of effectiveness of the program. Public opinion polls often use evaluative scales on which the interviewees rate the degree of effectiveness or acceptability of public officials and programs. An example of a formal evaluation procedure is the end-of-course student evaluation with which you may already be familiar. This type of evaluation is called "summative report" in the educational testing literature. However, we refer to this type as "subjective-summative report" to distinguish it from a second type, which we call "annotated-summative report."
Summative reporting of one's experiences at the end of some period of exposure is composed of the rater's subjective assessment (agreement or disagreement with questionnaire items). At the same time, the rater's subjective opinion may be turned into an objective fact if it is used as a vote, i.e., if it has a "political" function (e.g., being used for decision making about the instructor or the program). The "reliability" of summative- reports is independent of its "validity" and "social significance." For example, a difference may be highly reliable but either invalid or of little social significance (e.g., the size of the difference may be very small).
Annotated-summative reports are more informative than mere summative- reports since the rater explains ("annotates") the basis of holding a particular opinion. However, here too, both the summative reatings and their annotations are not as objective as "summative-witnessing reports" since the latter represent a compilation of on-going reactions, hence more actual than summative "guesses" or agreement with "prompted" items. A general principle to be remembered is that the content of evaluative reports is dependent on the social context in which the report is made.

Meta-Language in Science. Science is the community's executor of the enter- prise of organized knowledge. Its chief function is to systematize facts about our world. Its chief method is empiricism, i.e., "the theory that experience is the only source of knowledge" (Webster's). Science, according to Webster's, derives from the Indo-European root *sker, meaning to separate or cut, hence, to distinguish, to discern, or to know. The process of the differentiation of knowledge or ideas presumes comparison: the word concept refers to a template or standard of reference which acts as the distinguisher, comparator, or point of contrast to observations given in experience. The word '7concept" derives from -com, meaning "together" and capere (Latin) meaning "to take. " Thus, concepts are ideas that are "taken in, " formed in conception, and assigned a standard value or meaning. Thus, science is the organized enterprise whereby experience is broken up into abstract constituents called concepts which are standardized units of reference.
To understand social psychology, you must understand the history and method of science inasmuch as they form the context for social psychology. You are already familiar with the major issues in the history of science; this is because science education, i.e., teachings about science and its history, is also treated in our society as scientific training. Our children grow up to be society's scientists: their social education forms the ground upon which scientism is built. Thus, it is only necessary for us here to label elements in your general education which you already possess. This kind of "debunking" activity is called the development of meta-language. More than any other factor in the history of scientific evolution, meta-language has served as the foundation of the scientific method. Field theory concepts constitute a method- ology whose meta-language has been enormously successful in the natural sciences: thermodynamics in the field of physics, mechanics in the field of engineering, topology in the field of computer technology, morphogenesis in biology, and many others. The social sciences which include social psychology, sociology, anthropology, economics, political science, aesthetics, etc., have adopted all the essential characteristics of the meta-language in field theory. It is necessary at this point, to review the major issues on scientific methodology which have animated these branches of science involved with field theory concepts. If you come to understand these basic problems, you will gain an understanding of why scientific fields are divided into "schools" or schools of thought which divide them into factions that form sub-factions, coalitions, and cliques. This understanding is necessary because scientific work itself is being accomplished at the "clique level. " For example, psychology departments are divided into "areas" or "fields of specialization. " Each area has its own characteristic approach in isolating problems and talking about them. This gives an impression of bewilderment: the student is overwhelmed by the plethora of interpretations, models, assumptions, procedures, techniques, and so on. However, this impression later gives way for the serious and persistent student, to a gradually clarified vision which allows a much easier and comfortable and manageable adjustment, and hence potential productivity, progress, and the attainment of solutions are more likely. Because we have had to accommodate ourselves to the scientific method, and no doubt because we have been at it for a good portion of our lives, we have experienced such a clarification in the development of our own thinking. By presenting this here, we hope to be able

to save you some time and summarize for you what it is you should keep track of in your continued relationship to science.
First let us summarize the overall presentation we intend to give here. The first part will specify three particular issues of theory: (i) What is the "objective/ subjective" distinction? (ii) What are "environmental" vs. "inherent" factors? (iii) Is the world "continuous" or "discontinuous"? The second part then goes into three problems of method: (i) How do we go from the "general" to the "particular, " and vice-versa ? (ii) What is the "experimental method" ? (iii) What is @'field theory" ?
(i) Objective vs. Subjective. You will encounter the objective/subjective problem under a number of different appearances. For example, "anthropomorphism" means to commit the error of attributing human reasoning to non-human organisms or non- social systems. For instance, there is an old Hawaiian practice, which we observed a neighbor practicing the other day, of driving a rusty nail into some trees (e. g., avocado) because "the tree gets the idea it will die and this fear makes it give more fruit. " This anirnistic or anthropomorphic view is eschewed in science and the history of science is often presented by historians and philosophers of science as a history of continuous battles against "subjective" interpretations. Subjective is related to "subject" which means "to throw under" or to put under (sub- means "under" and Latin jacere means "to throw"; jactus is a verb-form of jacere forming subjectus = English subject). Objective derives from ob- (= toward, in the way of) and jacere (to throw). Thus, the relationship between objective and subjective relates to the distinction you can see in X is being put in the way of Y (i. e., treated as an object) versus X is being Put under the influence of Y (i. e., subjected, or treated as a subject). Consider the consequences of this equation.
To be a subject in an experiment implies that the person is being put under the influence of an investigator; this takes the form of coming to the laboratory and following instructions devised by the experimenter for his own purposes. The investigator's objectivity lies in the fact that he treats you as an object of investigation: by being a subject, you in effect become his object of study. Now transfer this relationship to yourself when you investigate your own self. In Mead's terms, the "I" investigates the "me. " Here it is obvious that the person splits into two conceptual (abstracted) elements. One acts in the role of investigator (when the I puts the me under observation) while the other acts in the role of object of investigation (when the me becomes the source of observational data).
(ii)Environmental vs. Inherent Factors. All modern scientific theories of man make use of the dialectics of objective/subjective. This is true of both the "soft" disciplines such as psychoanalysis and humanistic psychology as well as the "hard" disciplines of experimental psychology and sociobiology. Where they differ extensively is the stand they each take on the next problem, that of the environmental vs. inherent dichotomy. The hard disciplines are "hard" in the sense that they pursue rigor ahead of content and are therefore more rigorous than the soft disciplines that lay a greater emphasis on content. Because environmentalism is more amenable to rigorous treatment, the experimental and biological approaches to social behavior have em- phasized it over and above the inherent features. This differential emphasis is clearly seen today in the division in social psychology between behaviorists and cognitivists.

Behaviorists such as J. B. Watson and B. F. Skinner calculate behavioral acts as a function of reward/punishment ratios, i. e., community contingency practices. These are strictly environmental factors. Cognitivists such as Freud and Maslow calculate behaviors as a function of internal factors: needs, perceptions, beliefs, convictions. In both cases, however, the problem of explaining behavior is cast within the objective/subjective dichotomy. Thus, both Freud and Skinner are equally objective in their scientific work, but one attributes the causes of behavior largely to internal factors, the other, largely to environmental factors.
(iii) Continuity vs. Discontinuity. The third dichotomy that marks the history of theory in science, is the issue of continuity/discontinuity. This issue divides the factions and cliques within the disciplines so that you cannot predict whether a psychologist is a behaviorist or cognitivist by whether they use continuous or discontinuous models. You are familiar with continuous models: "evolution theory, " often hailed as biology's greatest discovery, is an attempt to account for discontinuous appearances in terms of continuous models. Plants, viruses, fish, birds, monkeys, people--the living species and groups on this planet appear to us as discontinuous. How did this plethora of forms of life come into being? This is the problem known as morphogenesis (morpho- means form and -genesis means development). Darwin's theory of evolution gave morphogenesis the following solution: the environment acts indirectly upon the genes through a process of selective survival. Selective survival is a consequence of differing amounts of success or adjustment to changes in the environment on the part of the single animal. Because changes in the gene structure of the offspring occur spontaneously, perhaps even randomly, particular individuals are born with anatomical and physiological alterations, some of which help those individuals to survive, others guarantee their extinction. These genetic changes eventually, over long time spans, produce new species. Thus, evolution theory creates a continuous model or process over time that accounts for the apparent discontinous phenomena of the species.
The world that Einstein brought into being at the turn of the twentieth century dislocated the prior scientific world of continuous explanatory models. Relativity theory was based on field theory concepts but it represented a discontinuous jump in the morphogenesis of scientific evolution. All prior continuous models such as Darwin's selective survival mechanism and Newton's mechanics, were now localized to a special theory under the operation of more general principles. These more general principles are however discontinuous: for example, matter and energy were not distinct; particles and waves turn out to be discontinuous forms of the same basic stuff; space, which is a local, surface "effect," contains the phenomena of motion and time, but these are not absolute--space bends, curves around, disappears, re- appears, produces holes where things disappear and quarqs where time jumps to other dimensions.
In summary, the history of scientific theory can be understood as the history of three problems: How to remain objective; Whether a phenomenon is to be accounted for in environmental vs. inherent terms; and how continuity vs. discontinuity is to be dealt with. In psychology, objective psychodynamics (Freud, Lewin, Rogers) has

been connected to objective ethnodynamics (Skinner, Mead, Krasner and *Ullmann) by seeing behavior as an outcome of both: sometimes continuously, sometimes discontinuously. We are now ready to consider the issues of method.
(i) General vs. Particular. The first problem of methodology in science is the application of general principles to particular events. This is the issue of prediction and control. The methodology of the natural sciences has been more successful than the social and behavioral sciences in this respect, namely, prediction and control of the behavior of physical bodies (particles, objects, stars, cells, organs) has been attained to a higher degree of actuality. General principles are cast in a meta-language whose components are exactly defined through a suitable notation system (mathematics, topology, chemical exchanges, etc.). Here application from general principles to particular cases has been good as shown by predictability of the movement of trajectories or falling bodies, the transmutation of elements into compounds and compounds into more complex structures, chemically, genetically, and bio- chemically. The field of engineering represents the highest embodiment of the scientific method of predicting the particular from the general. In the social and behavioral sciences, success has so far been more modest: social engineering and organizational management are still underdeveloped projects. Intuitive understanding of behavior, as given in experience by poets, novelists, and playwrights still out- weigh in interest and informativeness the scientific understanding and presentation of man's behavior. While scientists grapple with the problem of generalizing to real- life situations those principles of behavior that are derivable from laboratory set up9, the members of the larger community (including the scientists outside their laboratories) must continue to rely on informal knowledge for tending to society's business (education, child rearing, occupational training, self-consciousness, and art).
(ii) Hypothesis Testing. In scientific methodology, the prediction of the particular from the general, is accomplished through the extrapolation of experimental data to situations beyond the experiment. This is accomplished through a system of continuous steps in hypothesis testing. A hypothesis is empirically tested by setting up an appropriate experimental situation the results of which are used to confirm or disconfirm the hypothesis. In either case, more or different hypotheses are generated, and these are subjected to further empirical tests. This is known as the Baconian Method, after Sir Francis Bacon (died 1626) who is said to have originated this procedure. The story is told of young Bacon barging in on a conference of the learned discussing the number of teeth in a horse's mouth and shocking his superiors by suggesting that they look into the horse's mouth rather than deciding the issue on the basis of principles. The Baconian attitude was adopted (not before much persecution, we are told) and hypothesis testing became the law for future scientific communities. The meta-language of hypothesis-testing in science evolved from mathematics and graphics. Mathematics (from Greek mathema meaning what is learned, paid attention to, memorized) is a meta-language of symbols called "numerical" and is familiar to us in the form of calculations we make using numbers. Graphics (from Greek graphein meaning to write or represent in visual symbols) is a meta-language that is familiar to us from tables and charts we use to represent visually relationships among numbers. Because the representation is standardized,

graphics allows us to read complex interactions between variables which it would be impossible to keep track of in memory, or in abstract verbal symbols. Thus, mathematical equations and graphic portrayals or pictures organize for us many verbal propositions into a single, definite, and straightly visible form, giving us the simplifying and clarifying consequences of these tools of science.
(iii) The Doctrine of Interactionism. The third issue of scientific methodology is the doctrine of interactionism. No variable exerts its influence by itself: everything is enmeshed with everything else. A change here results in some effect there, and no change can take place without it affecting a series of other events and conditions. The world is a system: that means that systemic notions govern our explanations of change. "Systemic" means an orderly arrangement ("systematic") in which elements or components are linked in an interdependent order (from Greek syn- meaning together and histanai meaning to set). Field theory in science is the modern inheritor of systems theory, of establishing a totality, whole, or ge.qtalt whose emerging qualities gives us a discontinuous break between the whole and the sum of its parts. ln psychology, the systemic approach has been adopted as part of the scientific method. For example, Kurt Lewin's topological psychology pro- vides a system of analysis and representation (mathematics and graphics) that isolates elements such as environmental and inherent forces and calculates their interaction in terms of resultant effects on personality, behavior, perceptions, attitudes, etc. Note that this approach presupposes a fundamental distinction between forces and bodies: forces correspond to energy, work, pressure, inter- action, cause, and effect, while bodies correspond to particles, organisms, objects, groups, and interactants. This distinction between forces and bodies corresponds in non-field theory concepts to the distinction between features and elements. Features are characteristics (inherent) that belong to elements; elements are phenomenal objects that possess (inherent) characteristics, features, properties. Features are the structuralist counterpart to forces: here we say that an element's properties are inherent potentials that define ability or power to change. For example, an object has the capacity (potential) to move or change position without changg its internal composition: the apple in your hand is the same apple as the apple on the tree. In psychology, attributes and characteristics have been assigned to human beings as objects: they can move or stand still, they can be aroused or inhibited, facilitated in their inherent developmental features or hindered, and so on. In general, structuralist approaches are static and teleological: goal directed- ness is explained in terms of inherent features and characteristics rather than in field dynamic terms (environmental forces).
The Historical Context of Behaviorism. Today, we've reached the generation that will outlive the 20th Century, but the ideas of the 19th Century continue to influence us. This influence continues to exert itself on our working conceptions relating to the fundamental problems of understanding behavior. The l9th Century spawned the intellectual fish we are trying to grasp in our conceptual nets. Before the turn of the century, there had already been formulated the major issues that occupy the work of contemporary psychologists. We can mention the following main concepts, methods, and understandings that preoccupied 19th century psychologists and

"behaviorists": (i) the physiology of perception, sensation, and conditioning; (ii) associationism in verbal learning and reasoning; (iii) field dynamic conceptions of motivation and personality; (iv) ethnocultural influences on ideology. We would like to present our interpretation of the state of knowledge achieved in these four major areas up to the end of the 19th Century. Our interpretation is based more on an intuitive understanding of these issues, distilled over the years by our struggle to clarify these problems in our own work, rather than on the more usual historical study that presents the work and ideas of particular writers in a chronological sequence. The student interested in a scholarly investigation can follow up this initial discussion with more systematic readings in the literature either by consulting popular standard texts or searching available library holdings (see also References).
(i) Phvsiological Determinants of Behavior. The first issue concerns the physiological determinants of behavior. The exciting medical discoveries in the 17th and 18th centuries created the view that the physiological body was an organismic entity: behavior was the body's movement, and the body was a biological precision machine controlled by structures and functions. Hence, behavior came to be seen as mediated by physiological processes. This view led to a search for the functions, or functioning parts and processes. Hormonal action controlled our emotions and development. Genetic evolution controlled the range of our potential and the modalities of expression. Sensations were phenomenological (experiential, subjective) resultants of the mechanistic action of receptor organs at the periphery of the nervous system. Perceptions registered on our brain following a strict mathematical code (laws of neuronal activity). Conditioning was a process of neurophysiological "reflex, " or automatic action resulting from temporal contiguity between a stimulus processed by the peripheral system, and a synaptic connection in the central nervous system. Thus, the development in the 17th and 18th centuries of physiological knowledge about the organism, gave rise to a behaviorism that placed its control functions in a few basic processes of the body: sensation, perception, conditioning.
(ii) Associationism. The 19th century elaborated on these relatively simpler and elementary processes, and made them the starting point for investigating "higher" and "more complex" functions such as memory, attention, reasoning, and learning. Here, associationism was the major workhorse concept that gave rise to the experiementalism formally inaugurated by the founding of the first psychological laboratory by German psychologist Wilhelm Wundt in 1879. "Associationism" is the idea that complex human behaviors are based on built-up structures in the mind or brain (both locations were referred to). These associationistic structures were connected to each other in such a way as to reflect experience. If A was associated with B, it formed a compound, AB. Now this compound could hook up to other compounds CD, EF, etc., to form still more complex structures AB-CD-EF, and so on. By the time the individual attained the use of language and symbolism, the association of concepts, ideas, and responses acquired relative independence of the environmental stimuli and the sensations they gave rise to in phenomenological or subjective experience. Symbolic man was autonomous man, free to reflect, imagine, reason, plan, choose, etc. But these mental and behavioral processes or functions of the organism were not really autonomous: they were

complicated mechanisms built out of the simpler ones, and the latter remained solidly grounded in the physiology of perception and conditioning. Thus, both cognitivism and behaviorism of our day share a common origin in physiological as sociationism.
What were the laws of association? This issue occupied psycholofists till the very end of the 19th century. For example, William James' very influential work, Principles of Psychology (published in 1890) contains several chapters on this issue, and most of this is a review and evaluation of experimental work in the area. Famed Cornell psychologist E. B. Titchener, who studied with Wundt in Germany, imported (around 1900) the methods and theories of introspectionism--a special experimental procedure for investigating the association of learned habits of perception and attention ("concentration, " "focus of consciousness"). James and Titchener taught that the laws of association comprised frequency, contiguity, recency, saliency, similarity. These laws governed the formation of percepts and concepts, and were to account for the phenomena of perception, learning, memory, attention, and consciousness .
(iii) Motivation and Emotions. Thus far, we've discussed the physiological bases of behavior that were responsible for learning. But "learning" was only one of the fish created by the medical view of the body; another species of fish it brought into being was "emotion. " Here, we see the modern beginnings of field dynamic concepts in psychology inasmuch as emotion includes the idea of movement, or what makes the body move. ,a href="">Webster's reports that "emotion" comes from Latin e-, meaning "out of, " and movere, meaning "to move. " Thus, we inherit from tradition the idea that from the body there issues a something which moves out, is exciting, and gives rise to the awareness of feelings.
Thomas Hobbes, a 17th century British psychologist, wrote in his famous Leviathan, that emotions are impulses that are excited by external stimuli and internal instincts, and travel as impulses, making us move toward desirable goals and away from undesirable consequences. We recall, from our college days reading the striking pessimism in Hobbes' portrayal of man: homo hominem lupus est was his most fundamental doctrine of the human social contract (translates as: "man is a wolf to man" and implying a dog-eats-dog world of competition for self-survival, domination, and power). The 19th Century softened Hobbesian Behaviorism some- what by adding to the "lower" apparatus of emotions and animalistic impulses, the "higher" apparatus of cognitivism, as it was investigated and revealed in the laws of learning and association of ideas and concepts. But it nevertheless retained intact the idea that behavior was at times, and under certain "excitatory conditions, a direct outcome of "impulses" of a physiological nature.
(iv) Mental Measurement. Thus, the form, structure, and function of emotions became the third major issue that we inherited from the 19th Century (the other two, as discussed above, were the physiology of sensory processes, and the laws of association). Emotions, feelings, and impulses or instincts were inventoried, classified, and investigated for their etiology and behavioral consequences. "Etiology" refers to "origin" or "history of development. " Thus, the developmental and genetic

psychology of the 20th Century derives from a tradition that joins this genetic and psvcho-motor view of behavior to the statistical work pioneered before the turn of the century by British statistician Sir Francis Galton (died 1911). Galton, a precocious genius whose I.Q. is reported to have been in the 200's (see standard textbooks in Introductory Psychology), founded the field of eugenics, which Webster's defines as "the movement devoted to improving the human species through the control of hereditary factors in mating. " It is known (private com- munication from Professor Ronald *Johnson) that Galton left masses of data which he gathered on thousands of people whom he "measured" in every conceivable manner that he could devise: psycho-motor tests, perception tests, physical measurements, emotional reports, knowledge and information tests.
The idea of measuring mental and Physical abilities was a bold and novel one, and marks the modern beginnings of applied psychology. Today, this school of thought animates the work of many psychologists working as practitioners in the community: clinical therapy, industry, school, and advertising. In this view, behavior is to be viewed not so much as a function of the ongoing environmental stimuli, but rather, as a function of internal stimuli whose origin and maintenance are related directly to the genotypic constitution of the individual. "Genotypes" are biological types or classes of people. Each genotype (given by birth) gives rise to a personality type. Thus, behavior varies in range as set by constitutional factors: individual differences, as measurable by tests of ability and performance, will necessarily occur in any population, given that genetic differences in the human pool are already there. Thus, your personality as well as your physical features are an expression of your genotype. As well, you have genetic predispositions which five you strengths and weaknesses: given different physical environments, social systems, and opportunities for success, different predispositions will emerge in a population, whether anatomical, physiological, or psychological.
(v) Ethnocultural Humanism. The fourth and last issue we shall discuss in this brief historical review, concerns the views on the ethnocultural dependencies of human behavior (the other three, as discussed above, were: sensory, associationistic, and motivational). Here, the influence of the scientific humanists of the 18th Century predominates. You may have seen the Hollywood movie portrayal of the life of Thomas Moore (1779-1852), the "Man For All Seasons" who, like Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, and the other Renaissance humanists, was steeped in all the departments of science and community life. Here arose the idea in modern times that society works its ways according to cultural laws: Science was to be a tool of the community, strapped by the controls of morality, politics, and art. This idea is a theme encountered over and again in most of the writings of the major philosophers and social thinkers of the 18th and 19th centuries. German poet, novelist, and playwright Wolfgang von Goethe (died 1832) made important and original contributions to science in several areas: color theory, morphology, and "culturology. " Leibniz (died 1716) modernized mathematics and was influential in popularizing in the West, ideologies and world views from the East, particularly the Hindu teachings on cosmology. Georg Wilhelm Hegel (died 1831) advanced the new cultural ideology that gave rise to the ideas and work of the socialist, as well as sociological, theories of Engels and Karl Marx, the two modern founders of "socialism."

Today, these ideas form the groundwork for the social sciences and the humanities: sociology, social psychology, cultural anthropology, social work, political science, history, and art. Here, the basic idea revolves around the theme of the ethnocultural dependencies of behavior. Admitting all the earlier ideas from physiology, association, motivation, personality, genetics, as determiners of behavior, this fourth theme nevertheless represents an additional, necessary, and independent source of variation and influence. The socio-cultural environment is seen as operating to produce societal phenomena: class structure, politics, education, philosophy of life, art, tradition, moral imperatives--all are seen as behavioral influences in crime, health, inequality, economic and political behavior, ideology, ordering of values and priorities, law, mores, and creativity.
We've reached the end of our brief review of the four major themes we've inherited from the preceding three centuries. As the last quarter of the 20th Century lives itself out, will it also bring a solution to the problem of explaining behavior ? Scientists seem to be committed to a view of their work which makes it appear cumulative. This is certainly a valid view insofar as one concerns oneself with the accumulation of scientific data. When we were in college in the 1940's and 1950's, we were told by our scientist-teachers that science doubles its facts every decade. If this was true then, the rate now may be a multiple of that! This rate of growth is both admirable and worrisome. While it attests to great strides accomplished, it also evidences specialization of knowledge and a loosening grasp of the totality of man's context. Today, an expert knows a smaller proportion of the facts than ever before; he in effect knows less each year he continues his work! Could such a system truly lead us to a better grasp of behavior? Who has a better under- standing of human nature, the artist/playwright/novelist/poet, or the scientist? We leave these questions un-discussed, hoping that they may encourage your thinking and guide you to your own resolutions.
(vi) Natural History Methodology. We are already familiar with several types of strict notation systems: logic, algebra, geometry, tables, charts, forms, figures, maps, recipes, schedules, directories, catalgoues, indices, and so forth. In each case there is an exact correspondence (or, a correspondence within known limits) of some social event and an expression in the designated notation system (script, code, language). For example, a schematic figure of the components of an amplifier allow you to "put it together" because there is an exact correspondence between an event ("here is my completed amplifier") and a notation ("instructions").
You can now understand the reasons that prompt us to lay so much stress, in this course of study, on strict notation systems such as field-theory topology and ethnosemantics. Perhaps because of our background in the field of psycholinguistics, we are more open to the use of formal notation systems as these are part of the linguistic, sociolinguistic, and ethnolinguistic methodologies. As well, our back- ground in ethnology (cultural anthropology, educational curriculum, ethnography, ethnomethodology) alerts us immediately to the socio-cultural component of behavior influences, as against the physiological/medical. Because our interests and goals lie in the natural history description of behavior in social settings, it becomes essential to arm ourselves with tools of recording, i.e., notation systems for describing what one witnesses during a social occasion.

We feel strongly that the future, as well as the present, of social psychology, depends on the development of a natural history methodology; this means a notation system that is superior to ordinary description. Given a suitable notation system we can analyze the visible components of a situation, map these in charts, tables, or functional relations, and inspect the results. Inspection may take an intuitive form (in the case of visual graphics), or a statistical form (in the case of tables and numerical distributions). In both cases--intuitive and statistical inspection--the "inspector" reads the language of the notation system by transforming the displays (graph, matrix) into verbal propositions or statements. Here lies the principal value of notation-systems for social psychology; a social event, once notated (diagram, table) and annotated (verbal propositions), yields new knowledge about the situation. A good example is the emphasis we lay in this course on forms: the class feedback form (CFF); the exercise forms that the Investigation Teams (IT's) use; the forms for reporting data in the daily round archives (DRA); the forms for tables and charts of research reports; and others.
(vii) Morphogenesis and Empiricism. The study of the behaving self has been pursued in the past in the dimensions of physiology, neurophysiology, biochemistry, psychiatry, psychopathology, abnormal behavior, conditioning, sensory sciences, learned instincts, and affect, which includes sentiments, evaluations, and intuitions. The biographical dimension, however, has not been explored, insofar as we know, and at any rate, has not been incorporated into the body of transmitted literature in our training and professional readings.
The availability of technical empirical tools for generating data on the biographic dimension of the behaving self might certainly attract the attention of our colleagues. The work you are pursuing in the study of social psychology, and the ensuing contribution you are making to the DRA as Society's Witnesses, will, we believe, provide the necessary tool to the social psychologist for the experimental invesMgation of the biographic dimension of the behaving self. This is because, as Society's Witnesses, you are saving the observations from oblivion! ! You're being cultural archaeologists ! ! The accompanying diagram shows the horseshoe of the scientific method, as we interpret it:

It was useful and clarifying for us when we realized that our training as scientists, and our work as psychologists, and as educators, in short, the academic tradition of inquiry, can be stratified into 9 zones ("ennead" = a 9-step model--see dictionary). We think it would be similarly useful to you to have a working model which you can use as a reference diagram (or template--see dictionary) for locating parMcular scientific activities or concepts as you encounter them in your current and future academic studies. This is what you'll need to know about the model:
Zones 1 and 9: Etiology vs. Analysis: ETIOLOGY is the study of causes and origins (from Greek aitia, meaning cause or origin, and logia, meaning description). Etiology can be represented in field dynamic concepts as an arrow or vector. It has an origin and a directional force or "causal" Power to have an "effect. " ANALYSIS is the dissolving of the complex into the simpler (ana is Greek meaning up or throughout; lysis means loose or free; hence, ana + lysis = a freeing up or loosing of the parts from the whole).
Analysis or Etiology? This has been the question in the history of science --and the answers to it spawned the "schools" and "methodologies" of academic inquiry since its begnnings. Aristotle was the greatest of all etiologists; he is joined in rank by 19th century Goethe, and the contemporary French mathematician, topologist Rene Thom (1972). Francis Bacon (died 1626), Wilhelm Wundt (born 1832), and famed contemporary American psychologist R. B. *Cattell, are great examples of the analyticists in psychology.
Aristotle, Goethe, and Thom use the categorical methodologies (taxonomy, syntax, logic, math, graphics, topology, morphology); Bacon, Wundt, and *Cattell use the quantitative methodologies (statistics, experimental manipulation, data obtained under controlled conditions, repeatability of reports). We will call the categorical methodologies, morphogenesis, and the quantitative methodologies, empiricism.
Zones 1 and 9 thus represent two opposite polarities on the ends of the horseshoe model of science. Morphogenesis is the methodology that gives the scientist a longitudinal view (morpho- is Greek meaning FORM/STRUCTURE; -genesis means origin or cause). The development of form (anatomy) and structure (taxonomy are the foundations of biology; that branch is known as "morphology, " a term in- vented by Goethe, but the idea comes from Aristotle's writings. Rene' Thom (1972 has used modern mathematical methods of topology to account for such biological facts as cell division, mitosis, cytoplasmic structure, duplication, reproduction, and evolution (see the topological theory of catastrophes, p. 243). In contradis- tinction to morphogenesis, empiricism leads to the method of quantitative analysis; this provides, not a longitudinal view but a crosswise, or transverse view of cause- effect relation.
Zones 2 and 8: The method of etiology (1) produces description, (2) while the method of analysis, produces inference. Description means a transcribing (Latin de- = from; scribere = to write) or writing down. The descriptive tools of morphogenetic

transcription can be called a notation system: there is a one-to-one correspondence between that which is to be described and the code or inscription, or encoding. Maps and schematic diagrams are familiar notation systems. In contradistinction to these categorical models, empirical analysis produces inferencing. "Inference" means "leading into by reasoning, " and "reasoning" means a particular method of argumentation, as for example, the "standards" that are specified for reporting experimental data ("hypothesis testing").
In social psychology, field theory and elemental or strict behaviorism, are categorical methodologies in that descriptions of phenomena are analogic, i. e., they retain a one-to-one correspondence which can be "read off" directly from a suitable transformation (as in graphs, see "cumulative record"). The digital transformations of phenomena are quantitative or statistical; these do not retain a one-to-one correspondence to facts inasmuch as facts are transmuted into data, and data are complex distributions removed from the observations themselves. This brings us to Zones 3 and 7.
Zones 3 and 7: A graph (3) is defined as a direct spatial representation of the descriptions made through analogic encoding; it refers to "the determination of values, solution of problems by direct measurement on diagrams instead of by ordinary calculations" (Random House Dictionary). Statistics (7) is "the numerical state of things," i.e., the determination of values based on calculations. The Skinnerian behaviorists use graphs as the basic method of describing facts (see pp. 202-208). The experimental behaviorists use statistics.
Zones 4 and 6: Here we come to a hoary issue that divides schools in social psychology. Empirical analysis of statistically obtained inferences (Zones 9 + 8 + 7) is accomplished within the context of the experiment. Etiological descriptions through graphic analogy (Zones 1 + 2 + 3) yields, not the experimental reports, but the observations. "Observations" means "to watch out for" or to "pay heed to" ob- = Latin, "near"; servare = to save; keep). Thus observations are safe-keeping sum- mary statements of the graphic relations expressed in flow charts, diagrams, and function curves in a Cartesian coordinate system (Cartesian= from Descartes, who invented that notation system). By contrast, experimental reports, are empirical propositions based on selection and control; hence, empiricism relies on inferencing about statistical distributions of reports given by subjects or experimenters.
The reason this is a difficult issue is the ambivalent status of data as an input to theory (5). We shall consider this last issue now.
Zone 5: The horseshoe model of science shows that scientific theory (5) receives data for inspection and interpretation from two opposite sources. From the side of morphogenesis, theory receives mere observations; from the empirical side, it receives data in the form of experimental reports. The difficulty is that some scientists mistake experimental reports for mere observations. This is the problematic issue.

The position of Skinner on this issue is, we believe, correct. He has argued consistently for the past forty years that the statistical treatment of experimental reports given by subjects or experimenter, do not constitute observations of behavior (see p. ). He points out that theoretical concepts such as drive, cognitive process, personality, attitude, motivation, cognitive dissonance theory, attribution theory, and the like--in other words, the bulk concepts of experimental social psychology, are averaged, statistical approaches that permit group prediction but not individual prediction. This, he argues, shows that experimentalism is far removed from direct observation of behavior. Instead of experimentally derived concepts, Skinner "titles" groups of observations directly: "contingency practice" is the title given to all situational conditions that are directly observed on the graph ("cumulative record") as influencing its shape--when for example, there is a change in the frequency curve (baseline) after the introduction of a particular intervention (see pp. - ). Here, the observation is titled, but not transmuted into cal- culations, averagings, factorings, and the like.
As a mnemonic (= memory) device for remembering the enneadic model we present two poems that embody, line for line, the nine zones and their significance:

Poem A: Morphogenesis
Etymological Derivations:
Read downward.
Zone Significance
From where the origin came
Can be transcribed
Into diagrams
In order to keep the facts near
For seeing.
ETIOLOGY = aitia = cause; logia = record
DESCRIPTION = de- = from; scribere = to write
GRAPH = graphe = drawing; writing
THEORY = theros = onlooker; inspector; spectator

Poem B: Empiricism
The crosswise view of components
Can be led into
Through calculations of data
Obtained by venturing out
To see.
ANALYSIS = ana = throughout; lysis = dissolving
INFERENCE = in = into; fere = to lead; carry
STATISTICS = status = stand; (numerical state of things; standing)
EXPERIMENT = ex = out; peire = to venture; to try

Synopsis 23: Historical Issues in Social Psychology
Science is the community's attempt to organize knowledge in a systematic manner. The systematization of knowledge is achieved through the use of specially agreed upon "concepts" and these are referred to as the "meta- language" of science. Field theory concepts reviewed in this course represent a general scientific methodology (or meta-language) that has been very successful in both the natural and social sciences.
A primary distinction in scientific work is that between "subjective vs. objective." In the experimental method, the subject is the source of data: the subject's responses are subjective while the experimenter's treatment of the data is objective. In objective self-assessment, the reporter acts as both subject and investigator, hence the data undergo objective treatment as in the experimental procedure. In general, scientific procedures that ascribe the causes of behavior to "environmental factors" have been viewed as a more "rigorous" approach ( = "hard sciences") than those ascribing the causes of behavior to "internal factors" ( = "soft sciences"). However, from the point of view of objectivity, both external ( = behavioristic) and internal ( = cognitivist) approaches may be more or less objective, depending on their treatment procedures for data gathering. Continuity vs. discontinuity is another major theme in the meta-language of science. In general, the world around us appears discontinuous--e.g., the biological species; however, scientific theorizing (e.g., Darwin's evolution theory and Einstein's relativity theory) has always attempted to reconcile the "surface" appearance of discontinuity by offering "underlying" explanatory mechanisms that are continuous (e.g., selective survival--a continuous explanation--attempts to explain the morphogenesis of discontinuous forms of species).
The meta-language of science always involves extrapolating ( = prediction and control) from the general or universal to the particular, as best exemplified by the "engineering" fields. This process of extrapolation is called "hypothesis testing" (= the Baconian method). Here, mathematics and graphics are used to generate testable propositions. In field dynamic concepts, all behavioral movement or change is seen as a resultant of forces within a system. This is known as "the doctrine of interactionism" i.e., the idea that everything interacts with everything else. Objects and events are thought of in terms of elements and features: elements are bodies moving around and features one forces which affect them.
Viewed in historical perspective, most of the issues confronting psychology today have been formulated in the work of a few classically known workers starting in the 17th and 18th centuries, and culminating in the work of l9th century thinkers. For example, one of the great themes of the l9th century that we've inherited concerns the issue of the "physiological determinants of behavior." According to this view, human and infra-human behavior were seen as resultants of physiological and neurophysiological learning principles governed by sensory processes of conditioning and by genetic predispositions. "Associationism" was the doctrine whereby simpler processes of conditioning resulted in higher-order

compounds. In this view, all ideas, perceptions, reasonsings, were more complex behaviors built-up from the simpler mechanisms of association in experience. The general "laws" of associationism were found, in the experimental work of l9th century investigators, to be those of "frequency, contiguity, recency, saliency, and similarity." Though these laws governing human behavior were those of acquired habits, "motivation" or "emotion" were also retained as causative factors in behavior; hence, we may call this position by the name of "physiological associationism."
Emotions and other internal physiological-genetic factors such as instincts, predispositions, ability for higher reasoning, were classified and investigated as sources of behavioral determinants ( = antecedents or influencing agents). This gave rise to the important breakthrough idea of "mental measurement," pioneered by British behaviorist Francis Galton in the l9th century. An individual was seen as a composite of separate mental "factors" or "primary mental abilities," and a person's performance in any task situation was predicted on the basis of the measures obtained on his "mental abilities." Personality differences came to be categorized in a few basic types ( = "genotypes") each of which gave rise to limiting variations thereof ( = "phenotypes").
Added to the physiological determinats of behavior are the societal forces that spring from community life. This was an "ethnocultural humanism" that balanced "physiological determinism" by adding purely culturological factors to the significant agents of influence in human behavior. In the end, the view prevails that behavior is a joint function of ideology and physiology. The investigation of "situated behavior," i.e., behavior in your natural habitat ( = Daily Round), becomes therefore the logical pursuit in the investigation of the laws of human exchanges. This orientation may be called "natural history methodology" in social psychology.
All methodologies in scientific work must conform to the specified standards of the "scientific method." It is important to understand the logical (or epistemological) grounds of this method of human inquiry. This may be done with the aid of an enneadic model presented in the form of a horseshoe. The four contrastive polarities, each side representing two different schools of thought--"empiricism" and "morphogenesis"--may be listed as follows: (i) analysis vs. etiology ( = transverse/crosswise view of something vs. its longitudinal view); (ii) inference vs. description ( = conclusions based on hypothesis testing reasoning vs. inspection of notation systems); (iii) statistical vs. spatial ( = numerical transformation of data vs. graphic representation of natural records); (iv) experiments vs. observations ( = special set-ups vs. natural records as sources of evidence and fact). The top of the "horseshoe" may be called "theory" for both schools. Thus, "theory," in the scientific method, is a form of inspection of evidence, and evidence is fed into it from two contrastive schools-- empricism and morphogenesis. A mnemonic "poem" for recalling the enneadic model of the scientific method is the following: "From where the origin came [ = etiology], Can be transcribed [ = description , Into diagrams

[ = graph], In order to keep the facts near [ = observation], For seeing [ = theory]. This poem may then be titled "Morphogenesis." The second part may be titled "Empiricism" and is composed of the following lines: "The crosswise view of components [ = analysis], Can be led into [ = inference], Through calculations of data [ = statistics], Obtained by venturing out [ = experiment], To see [ = theory]."


Aarons, A., B.Y. GordonandW. Stewart(Eds.).
Linguistic-Cultural Differences
and American Education, Special Anthology Issue of The Florida FL
Reporter, Vol. 7, 1969.

American Psychological Association. Ethical Principles in the Conduct of Research
with Human Participants, Washington, D. C.: APA Inc., 1973.

*Arkoff, Abe. Adjustment and Mental Health. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968.

Babbit, I. The Dhammapada (Translated from the Pali with an Essay on Buddha
and the Occident), New York: Oxford University Press, 1936.

Backman, C.W. and P.F. Second, (Eds.), Problems in Social Psychology:
Selected Readings. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966.

Bales, R.F. Personality and Interpersonal Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart,
& Winston, 1970.

Berkowitz, L. (Ed. ). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, New York:
Academic Press, 1977.

Birren, J.E. The Psychology of Aging. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall,

Boucher, J. and C.E. Osgood. "The Pollyana Hypothesis." Journal of Verbal
Learning and Verbal Behavior, 8, 1-8, 1969.

Brislin, R. W. Culture Learning: Concepts, Applications, and Research.
Honolulu, Hawaii: The East-West Center, 1977.

Butler, R. N. Why Survive? Being Old in America. New York: Harper & Row, 1975.

Dewev. J. Leibniz's New Essavs Concerning the Human Understanding. New York:
Hillary House, 1961.

DHAMMAPADA, see Babbit, I.

Goffman, E. Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order, New York:
Basic Books, 1971 (Harper Colophon Books, 1972).

Goffman, E. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. Englewood
Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1963.

Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, New York: Doubleday
& Co., Inc., 1959.

Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan. Cohesion in English. London: Longman, 1976.

Harre, R. (Ed. ). Life Sentences: Aspects of the Social Role of Language.
London: Wiley, 1976.

Hernstein, R.J. and E.G. Boring (Eds.). A Source Book in the History of
Psychology. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965.

Hollander, E. P. Principles and Methods of Social Psychology (Third Ed. ).
New York: Oxford University Press, 1976.

Hull, C. L. "The goal gradient hypothesis and more learning," Psychological
Review, 1932, 39, 25-43.

Jakobovits, L. A. "Comparative Psycholinguistics in the Study of Culture, "
International Journal of Psychology, Vol. 1, 1966, pp. 15-37, reprinted
in translated version (French) in T. Slama-Cazacu (Ed. ) La Psycholinguistique,
Paris: Editions Klincksieck, 1972.

Jakobovits, L.A. Some Potential Uses of the Cross-cultural Atlas of Affective
Meanings (1967), reprinted in W. W. Lambert and R. Weisbrod (Eds. ),
Comparative Perspectives on Social Psychology. Boston: Little Brown
and Co., 1971.

Jakobovits, L.A. "The Affect of Symbols: Towards the Development of a Cross-
Cultural Graphic Differential," International Journal of Symbology, Vol. 1,
1969, pp. 28-52.

Jakobovits, L.A. "Semantic Satiation and Cognitive Dynamics," The Journal of
Special Education, Vol. 2, 1967, pp. 35-44.

Jakobovits, L.A. "Mediation Theory and the 'Single-Stage' S-R Model: Different?",
Psychological Review, Vol. 73, 1966, pp. 376-381.

Jakobovits, L.A. "Utilization of Semantic Satiation in Stuttering: A Theoretical
Analysis," Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, Vol. 31, 1966,
pp. 105-114.

Jakobovits, L.A. The Effects of Repetition in Behavior: Studies on the Phenomenon
of Semantic Satiation, unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Department of
Psychology, McGill University, 1962.

Jakobovits, L.A. and B. Y. Gordon. Workbook for the Study of Social Psychology
(2nd Edition). Department of Psychology, University of Hawaii, 1978.

Jakobovits, L. A. and B. Y. Gordon. "The Social Psychology of Language
Teaching," in Teaching English in Japan, Tokyo, Japan: Eichosha
Publishing Co., 1977 (in press).

Jakobovits, L.A. and B.Y. Gordon. Community Cataloguing Practices (Series
I through Vl), Department of Psychology, University of Hawaii, 1975-1977
(mimeo). (Abbreviated as J & G, 1975-77.)

Jakobovits, L.A. and B.Y. Gordon. The Context of Foreign Language Teaching.
Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers, 1974.

James, W. The Principles of Psychology, Vols. 1 and 2, New York: Dover
Publications, Inc., 1890, 1950.

*Johnson, R.C. and G.R. Medinnus. Child Psychology: Behavior and Develop-
ment (Third Ed.). New York: John Wiley, 1974.

Kanizsa, G. Subjective Countours. Scientific American, April 1976, 48-52.

Kohler, W. Gestalt Psychology. New York: H. Liveright, 1929.

Kono L. Psychology 499 Research Project for Prof. Jakobovits, Department of
Psychology, Spring 1978. (Typewritten)

Krasner, L. and *L.P. Ullman. Behavior Influence and Personality: The Social
Matrix of Human Action. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1973.

Kuhn, J. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, Ill.: University of
Chicago Press, 1962.

Leibniz, G. W. Discourse on the Natural Theology of the Chinese. Monograph
No. 4 of the Society for Asian and Comparative Philosophy, 1977.

Lewin, K. Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics.
New York: Harper & Brothers, 1948.

Lewin, K. Principles of Topological Psychology. (Tr. by F. and G.M. Heider. )
New York: McGraw-Hill, 1936. (Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1969).

Lewin, K. A Dynamic Theory of Personality: Selected Papers. (Tr. by D. K.
Adams and K.E. Zener. ) New York: McGraw-Hill, 1935.

Lindzey, G. and E. Aronson (Eds. ). The Handbook of Social Psychology (Second Ed. ).
(Vol. 2, Research Methods.) New York Addison-Wesley, 1968 (first ed.,

*Macdonald, W.S. Battle in the Classroom: Innovations in Classroom Techniques.
Scranton, Pa.: International Textbook Company, 1971.

*Macdonald, W.S. and *G. Tanabe (Eds. ). Focus on Classroom Behavior:
Readings and Research. Springfield, m. Charles C. Thomas, 1973.

Mayer, J. The Techniques, Basic Concepts, and Preconceptions of Science and
Their Relation to Social Study. Philosophy of Science, October 1935, 2
(4): 431-483.

Mead, G.H. The Philosophy of the Act. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1938.

Mead, G.H. Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934.

Mead, G.H. The Philosophy of the Present. LaSalle, Ill.: Open Court Publishing
Co., 1959 (original: 1932).

Milgram, S. The Individual in a Social World: Essays and Experiments. Reading,
Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1977.

Mirjafari, A. Differential Weighting of Stimulus Information As a Function of
Positive and Negative Behavioral Orientations. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation, University of Hawaii, 1978.

Morgan, C. L. The Animal Mind. New York: Longmans, 1930.

Mowrer, O.H. (Ed.). Morality and Mental Health. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1967.

Mowrer, O.H. (Ed.). Psychotherapy: Theory and Research. New York: The
Ronald Press, 1953.

Newcomb, T.M., R.H. Turner, and P.E. Converse. Social Psychology: The
Study of Human Interaction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1965.

Ouspensky, P.D. The Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution (2nd Edition).
New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1974. (1934; 1954)

Pavlov, I. P. Conditional Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity
of the Cerebral Cortex. Oxford University Press: Humphrey Milford, 1927.

Peirce, C.S.S. The Philosophv of Peirce: Selected Writings. Ed. by J. Buchler.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1940.

Pukui, Mary K., E. W. Haertig, and Catherine A. Lee. Nana I Ke Kumu (Look
To The Source). Honolulu, Hawaii: Hui Hanai, Queen Liliuokalani
Children's Center, 1972 (Vol. 1).

Roberts, J. Adventures in Consciousness: An Introduction to Aspect Psychology.
New York: Prentice-Hall, 1975.

Rice, J.R. Prayer: Asking and Receiving. Murfreesboro, Tenn.: Sword of the
Lord Publishers, 1974 (first published, 1942).

Rivera, J. De (Ed. ). Field Theory as Human-Science Contributions of Lewin's
Berlin Group. New York: Gardner Press, 1976.

Schenkein, J. (Ed. ). Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction.
New York: Academic Press, 1978.

Sinclair, J. McH. and R. M. Coulthard. Towards an Analysis of Discourse: the
English Used by Teachers and Pupils. London: Oxford University
Press, 1975.

Snider, J.G. and C. E. Osgood (Eds.). Semantic Differential Technique: A
Sourcebook. Chicago: Aldine, 1969.

Skinner, B. F. Cumulative Record: A Selection of Papers. (Third Edition).
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1972.

Skinner, B. F. The Technology of Teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-
Crofts, 1968.

Skinner, B. F. Verbal Behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1957.

*Staats, A. W. Social Behaviorism. Homewood, m. The Dorsey Press, 1975.

Thom, R. Structural Stabilitv and Morphogenesis: An Outline of a General
Theory of Models (Translated from French by D. H. Fowler). Reading,
Mass.: W.A. Benjamin, 1975.

Washburn, M. F. The Animal Mind: A Text-Book of Comparative Psychology.
New York: MacMillan, 1936.

*Watson, D.L. and *R.G. Tharp. Self-directed Behavior: Self-modification for
Personal Adjustment (second edition). Monterey, Calif.: Brooks/Cole
Publishing Co., 1977.

*Weaver, H. (Ed.). Selected Readings for Introducing Psychology. Berkeley:
McCutchan, 1968.

Wegner, D. M. and R.R. Vallacher. Implicit Psychology: An Introduction to Social
Cognition. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.

Wilson, E. O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, Mass.: The Belknap
Press of Harvard University Press, 1975.

Wolpe, J. Reciprocal inhibition as the main basis of psychotherapeutic effects.
Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 1954, 72, 205-226.

Young, R.E., A. L. Becker, and K. L. Pike. Rhetoric: Discovery and Change.
New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1970.

Zeeman, E.C. "Catastrophe Theory," Scientific American, April 1976, 65-83.

Name Index


ABELSON, R. A., 263
OFFICE, UH, 283, 297
ALLPORT, G., 80, 188
ANDERSON, N. H., 264
ARISTOTLE, 134, 321
*ARKOFF, A., 68, 69, 70


BACON, F., 314, 321, 324
BALES, R. F., 104, 105, 111
BARKER, R., 51, 80-81
BECKER, A.L., 81
BINDRA, D., 63
BIRREN, J. E., 195
BLACK, K., 80
BORING, E. G., 209
BOUCHER, J., 265
BUTLER, R. N., 196


*CATTELL, R.B., 321
CHOMSKY, N., 262
SCALE, 264, 271
CONVERSE , P. E ., 103
COPERNICUS, 143, 262


DARWIN, C., 230, 237, 242, 262, 313
DAVIS, 264
DESCARTES, R., 143, 230, 259, 260, 322
DEWEY, J., 123, 230, 259-261
DOE, 203
*DUBANOSKI, R., 207, 208


EINSTEIN, A., 143, 230, 237, 242, 243, 262, 313
ENGELS, F., 318


FECHNER, G. T., 184
FESTINGER , L ., 80, 263
FOSS , B., 188
FRANK, J. D., 188
FRANK, L. K., 80
FRENCH , J., 80
FREUD, S., 184-185, 229, 313, 314


GALILEO, 143, 230
GALTON, F ., 318, 325
GEER, 70
GOETHE, W., 123, 230, 318, 321
GORDON, B. Y., 92, 119, 229, 304, 305


HAERTIG, E. W., 116, 197

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Name Index (Continued)

H (Continued)

HEBB, D. O., 63
HEGEL, G. W., 318
HEIDER , F ., 80
HELMHOLZ, H. L. F., 184
HERNSTEIN , R . J ., 209
HILGARD, E., 238
HINDU, 318
HOBBES, T., 317
HOULAND, C. I., 262, 263
HULL, C., 62, 64, 65, 262, 263
HUXLEY, A., 188


JAKOBOVITS, L.A., 51, 63, 64, 92, 119, 229, 249, 265, 284, 293, 295, 298, 304, 305, 306
JAMES, W., 123, 229, 238, 258, 317
*JOHNSON, R., 192-194, 318
JOHNSON, S., 123
JONES, J. M., 264
JUNG, C., 255


KAFKA, F., 83
KANISZA, G., 84, 85
KANT, E., 123
KELLEY, G., 263
KELLEY, H. H., 263, 264
KOCH , S., 188
KOHLER , W., 83
KONO, L., 275, 280
KRASNER, L., 185-187, 314
KUHN , T ., 262


LAMBERT, W. E., 63, 64
LEARY, T., 56
LEE, C. A., 116, 197
LEIBNIZ, G. W., 230, 243, 259-261, 318
LEWIN, K., 50, 74, 75, 80, 81, 88, 184, 243, 313, 315
LOCKE, J., 260


*MAC DONALD, S., 203, 204, 205, 207
McKELLAR, P., 188
MARX, K., 123, 229, 318
MASLOW, A., 313
MAXWELL, J. C., 243
MAY, W., 65
McKEACHEE, W. J., 286
MEAD, G. H., 104, 123-128, 187, 222, 312, 314
MEDINNUS , G . R., 192-194
MENCKEN, H. L., 123
MILNER, P., 63
MIRJAFARI, A., 263, 264, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270
MIRON, M. S., 65
MOBIUS, A. F., 143, 243
MONTAGU, M. F. A., 188
MOORE, T., 318


NEWCOMB, T. M., 56, 76, 77, 103
NEWTON, I., 143, 230, 243, 313


OLDS, 63

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Name Index (Continued)

O (Continued)

ORNSTEIN, R. E., 238
OSGOOD, C. E., 63, 263, 265, 281
OUSPENSKY, P. D., 81, 220-231


PASCAL, B., 230
PAVLOV, I. P., 61, 184
PEIRCE , C ., 258-259
PIKE, K. L., 81
PLANK, M., 143
PLATO, 230
PUKUI, M. K., 116, 197


RIEMANN , G. F . B., 243
ROBERTS, J., 255, 256, 257, 258
ROGERS, C., 313


SETH, 256, 257
SKINNER, B. F., 186, 187, 201-203, 205-207, 219, 232, 233, 239, 242,
313, 314, 322, 323
SNIDER, J. G., 262
SPINOZA, B., 260
SUCI, G., 262
SZASZ, T., 188
*STAATS, A., 62, 187


*TANABE, G., 205, 207, 208
*THARP, R., 187, 207, 209, 210, 212
THOM , R., 81, 243, 321
TURNER, R. H., 103


*ULLMANN, L., 185-187, 314


*WATSON, D., 187, 207, 209, 210, 212 WATSON, J. B., 123, 152, 187, 209, 219, 313
*WEAVER, H., 188
WEBER, M., 123
WERTHEIMER, M., 80, 83
WHITE, R.K., 75, 76
WILSON, E. O., 93
WOLPE , J., 65
WUNDT, W., 127, 316, 321


YALE GROUP, 262, 281
YOUNG, R. E., 81


ZEEMAN, E . C ., 243
ZEN, 225

Object Index


-role of wishing in, 232
-self-modification, 209, 230-231
AGING, 195-197
ANNOTATING, 135, 140-155, 167-182, 184a, 226, 240, 244, 320
-and causal attributions, 271ff., 281
-DRA data samples, 293ff.
-feedback forms, 298ff.
-investigative annotation, 302
-summative reports, 284ff., 291, 293ff., 309
-transcript, 278ff.
-behavior control, 186-187, 214, 219, 230-231, 233ff.
-bird stories, 129
-in classification of interpersonal attitudes, 56
-in the creation of community, 200, 202, 219
-future-making, 246ff.
-legislative actions, 286
-in praying & resolutions, 252-253
ASTRODYNAMICS, 226, 229, 232, 240, 242, 243, 244, 247, 250
-attribution-theory, 263ff.
-causal attribution in natural talk, 271ff., 280
-defined, 275
-in DRA annotations, 153-155
-halo effect, 266
ATTRIBUTION (Continued) -measures of, 269-271
-psychodynamic theory of, 262 -Section 20, 262
-stimulus attributes, 264ff.


-physiological determinants of, 316
-see also: (compound entries below) BEHAVIOR INFLUENCE
-group role, 110
-individual variability, 192ff., 230-231
-Lewin's action research, 74
-and personality, 61, 75
-praying as change agent, 238
-Section 4, 61-66
-Section 14, 184-189
-spiritual essence, 230-231, 235
BEHAVIORAL CONTROL, 203, 209, 216, 219, 234, 245
BEHAVIORAL OBJECTIVES, 203, 205, 213, 219, 294
BEHAVIORISM, 312-313, 317
-behavioristic approach to personality, 185
-historical context of, 315-316, 322
-operant learning, 207ff., 219
-social, 123-128
BIFURCATION SET, 245, 246, 249
-language dominance, 52

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subiect Index (Continued)

B (Continued)

BIOGRAPHY, 300, 320
-cumulative records, 209
-DRA classification scheme, 163-165
-DRA data samples, 144, 146, 155, 167-182
-objective, 225ff., 230-231
-techniques for keeping track, 136
-the unique self, 124, 128
-vita sample, 144
-witnessing, 134
-No. 1, 55
-No. 2, 60
-No. 3, 67
-No. 4. 73
-No. 5, 78
-No. 6, 89
-No. 7, 100
-No. 8, 112
-No. 9, 122
-No. 10, 129
-No. 11, 138
-No. 12, 183
-No. 13, 190
-No. 14, 199
-No. 15, 219a
-No. 16, 231a-b
-No. 17, 242a-b-c
-No. 18, 261a-b
-conflict situation, 68
-in field theory, 50, 80ff.
-as personality layers, 50
-role behaviors, 93ff.
-scientific standards, 189
-within groups, 74ff.


-classification of interpersonal attitudes, 56
-conflict, 68ff.
-group space, 81
COGNITIVISM, 312-313, 317
-implicit theories, 266 -knowing, 237-239
-in Lewin, 80
-in Ouspensky, 220ff.
-in social psychology, 118
-in study of personality, 185
-classroom, 287ff., 290
-ethnography, 243
-future-making, 243ff.
-Genesis Problem, 200
-personal vs. community consciousness, 250
-relation to science, 314, 318-319
-Section 10, 113-121
-as shared daily round, 113ff.
-vs. society, 116ff.
-topology, 243ff.
-and witnessing, 133
-see also: WITNESSING
-interventions, 201ff., 219
-management of reinforcers, 201ff.
-open classrooms, 205
-Section 16, 200ff.

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subject Index (Continued)

C (Continued)

-age factor, 195
-classical paradigm, 61
-in historical context, 316
-neurosemantics, 61
-operant, 185-187, 200ff., 207ff., 216ff., 219, 232ff.
-reinforcement, 61, 63, 216
-rG, 62-66
-S-R, 62
-and adjustment, 68ff.
-field dynamic concept, 68-72
-frustration as, 69
-operant learning, 187
-resolution, 68ff.
-Section 5, 68-72
-types of, 69ff.
-and astrodynamics, 236ff.
-catastrophe model, 245ff.
-of community, 172, 243ff.
-evolution of, 220ff., 255ff.
-functions of, 221ff., 230
-future-making, 245ff.
-higher-consciousness, 230, 237ff., 242, 255ff., 258ff.
-in introspectionism, 317
-Mead's treatment, 123ff.
-objective, 221ff.
-personal vs . community, 250
-in relation to the laws of associationism, 317
-Section 17, 220-231
-self-consciousness, 221ff.
-source self, 255ff.
-topological applications, 243ff.
-J. B. Watson on, 209
-and Witnessing, 240ff.
-in conditioning paradigm, 62

C (Continued)


-classroom management, 202ff., 219
-defined, 201, 202
-practices, 313, 323
-in praying, 233-234, 240, 242
-superstitious behavior, 233
-vs. discontinuity, 313-314
-bird stories, 261a-b
CUMULATIVE RECORDS, 207, 209ff., 213ff., 219, 323


-Daily Round Archives-DRA, 136, 140-182, 210, 240-241
-Daily Round Principle, 113ff.
-definition for community, 113
-DRA data, 132ff., 210
-DRA data samples, 144, 146-155, 167-182, 250-253, 274, 275, 277-280, 293
-DRA Index, 156-165
-as laboratory, 210
-natural history methodology, 325
-Section 12, 132-137
-Section 13, 140-182
-Synopsis 12, 137
-techniques for keeping track, 136
-witnessing, 133ff., 240ff.
-student comments, 295ff.
-see also: COMMON SENSE

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subject Index (Continued)

D (Continued)

-effects on "Connections," 96
-variables in clique structure, 76-77
-dramatizing catastrophe, 245ff.


-behavioral control of, 211ff., 216ff., 225
-conflict, 68ff., 211ff., 216ff.
-deautomatization, 224ff., 228, 231
-desensitization of, 65
-differentiation of, 65
-etymology, 317
-in historical context, 317
-negative emotions, 224
EMPIRICISM, 311, 320-323
-mnemonic poem, 323
-vs. inherent factors, as historical issue, 312-313
-and community classroom, 200, 219
-intervention, 201, 203ff.
-management of reinforcers, 201ff.
ESSENCE, 224, 237, 238, 241, 255
-in behavioral control, 185-186
-Mead's treatment, 127
-variability, 273, 281
ETHNODYNAMICS, 93, 114, 126, 135, 185, 200, 226-229, 235, 240, 242,
244, 247, 250, 314
ETIOLOGY, 317, 320ff.
-witnessing, 133
-theory of, 262
-Darwinian, 192ff., 237
-Ouspensky, 220ff.
-Roberts, 255ff.
-No. 1, 20-21
-No. 2, 22-23
-No. 3, 24
EXPERIENCE, 124-125, 247, 255ff., 284, 289, 311


-family setting, 193ff.
-OHANA system, 116
-No. 1, 8-9
-No. 2, 10-11
-No. 3, 12-15
-No. 4, 16-17
-No. 5, 18-19
FIELD THEORY, 50, 56, 68, 74, 76, 80ff., 102, 135, 192, 202, 235, 243,
245, 255, 311, 313, 322, 324

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subject Index (Continued)

F (Continued)

FIELD THEORY (Continued)
-Section 7, 80-88
-system, 315
FOLD CURVE, 245, 246, 249
FORMS, 297ff., 320
-catastrophe theory, 243ff.
-praying & resolutions, 250-253
-Section 19, 243
-topological applications, 243ff.
-see also: PRAYING

G (Continued)

-vs. particular, 314
GENOTYPES, 264, 318, 325
-of Lewin, 80
-of Wertheimer and Kohler, 84
GOD, 237, 242, 258-259
GRAPHICS, 314, 320, 322
GRAVITY/LOVE, 243, 245>
-clique structure, 57-58, 76, 103
-communication networks, 95-96
-as dynamic concept, 102ff.
-group role, 104ff.
-index of similarity, 261a-b
-multiple membership, 86-87
-norm groups, 283
-norms, 75
GROUP (Continued)
-Section 6, 74-77
-as a social milieu, 74-77
-territoriality, 261a-b
-attraction structures, 56-58, 76, 103
-frequency of interaction, 76
-the group as social milieu, 74-77
-see also: GROUP


-DRA classification scheme, 163-165
-six daily round stages, 114-115
HALO EFFECT, 266, 281
-associationism, 316
-continuity vs. discontinuity, 313-314
-doctrine of interactionism, 315
-environmental vs. inherent factors, 312 -313
-ethnocultural humanism, 318-319
-general vs. particular, 314
-historical context of behaviorism, 315-316
-hypothesis testing, 314-315
-mental measurement, 317-318
-meta-language in science, 311-312
-morphogenesis and empiricism, 320-323
-motivation and emotions, 317
-natural history methodology, 319
-objective vs. subjective, 312
-physiological determinants of behavior, 316
-Section 23, 311-326
-ethnocultural humanism, 318ff.

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subiect Index (Continued)


I, 312
-identifying, 224
-as subjective self, 220, 223
-aging, 195-197
-child psychology, 192
-psychometric measurement, 192
-Section 15, 192-198
INTERIOR DIALOG, 151, 167, 172-181, 272ff., 274ff., 281
-see also: SELF
-classification of, 56
-in DRA data, 154-155
-frequency of interaction, 76
-generalized other, 125
-interpersonal relations, 76-77, 102 -111
-reciprocation of attractiveness, 56, 103
-relationship networks, 95-96
-Section 3, 56-59
-self-reflection, 124-125
-attitudinal distribution, 97
-attraction structure, 103
-interaction process analysis, 104ff.
-Section 9, 102-111
-sociometry, 103ff.
-in learning and teaching, 203ff., 219
-Premack Principle, 216
-in behavioral orientations, 267

I (Continued)

-formative evaluations, 300
-in historical context, 318
-doctrine of, 315
-system, 315


-cumulative records, 207, 219
-daily round techniques, 136, 226, 230


-autocratic vs. democratic, 75-76
LITERACY, 119-120, 136, 140, 149


MEDICAL MODEL, 185-186, 195-197
MENTAL HEALTH, 70, 224, 230-231
-definition of "concept, " 311
-definition of "science, " 311
-knowing and essence, 237
-in science, 311-312, 324-326
-scientific method, 311ff.

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subject Index (Continued)

M (Continued)

-aging factors, 196-198
-behavior influence, 186
-daily round, 135ff.
-DRA classification scheme, 163-165
-five types, 117
-historical issues, 311ff., 314
-natural history, 119, 236, 319ff.
-nature of data, 132
-objectivity vs. experimentalism, 132, 236
-operant conditioning, 185-187, 202, 206ff., 207ff., 216ff., 219, 232ff.
-positive and negative bias, 230-231, 233, 235ff.
-revolutions and fads, 262
-social behaviorism, 123ff.
-standards, 187-188
-in study of consciousness, 223, 230-231, 233-234, 236ff., 244ff.
-summative reports, 284ff.
-symbolic interactionism, 123, 125
-in the technology of praying, 232ff.
MONAD, 260
MORPHOGENESIS, 134-135, 236, 238, 243, 313, 320-323
-mnemonic poem, 323


NEGATIVE BIAS, 230-231, 233, 242
NEUROSEMANTICS, 61, 66, 126, 229
-annotations, 140ff., 226
-in aspect psychology, 255ff.
-catastrophe model, 245-249

N (Continued)

-communication networks, 95-96, 108-109
-conditioning paradigm, 61, 233-234
-conflict as field dynamic concepts, 68-69
-cumulative records, 207ff., 219
-DRA classification scheme, 163-165
-frame diagrams, 117
-the group as social milieu, 50-51, 74-75
-inductive charts

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subject Index (Continued)

N (Continued)

-language dominance, 52
-meta-languages in science, 314, 324
-morphogenesis and empiricism, 320ff.
-psychological space, 82-83, 87
-relationship formation, 56-58
-reporting, 119, 136, 226
-role and status, 94
-for social occasions, 184a
-strict notations, 319ff.
-time line, 235-237
-for transcripts, 147-150


OBJECTIVITY, 119, 125-126, 132ff., 149, 152, 200, 222ff., 247, 249, 265
-vs. subjective, in historical context, 312
-see also: WITNESSING
OHANA, 116, 197


-classical conditioning, 61
-daily round approach, 135ff.
-generative linguistics, 262
-methodologies, 117
-new notation systems, 143
-operant learning, 185-187, 207ff., 216ff., 219, 233-234
-S-R, 262
-standards, 187-188
-switches-Kuhn, 262, 281
-see also: METHODOLOGY

P (Continued)

-aging, 195-197
-aspect psychology, 255ff.
-behavior influence, 65
-behavioral orientation in attribution theory, 263ff.
-behavioristic vs. cognitivist approaches, 185
-conflict, 68ff.
-effects on group, 77
-essence vs. personality, 224
-family setting, 193ff.
-genotypes, 318, 325
-group role, 104ff.
-group's effect on, 74ff.
-illusion of unity, 220ff.
-implicit theories of, 266, 275
-interior dialog, 272ff., 274ff.
-interpersonal accessibility, 50
-legitimacy of self, 172-181
-medical model, 185
-permeability, 50
-Pollyanna Hypothesis, 265
-potential evolution of, 220ff.
-reinforcement history, 267
-role membership, 86-87, 94-96
-self and social experience, 124ff.
-standardized imaginings, 274ff.
-testing, 184-185, 192-193, 206, 224, 264, 269-271
POSITIVE BIAS, 230-231, 235ff., 242, 243, 255
PRAGMATISM, 123, 258
-astrodynamics of, 235
-behavioral paradigm, 232-233
-behavioral technology of, 232ff., 239ff.
-bird stories, 131
-DRA data samples on, 250-253

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subiect Index (Continued)

P (Continued)

PRAYING (Continued)
-future-making, 243ff., 256
-Section 18, 232-242
-sociodynamics of, 249ff.
-superstitious behavior, 232ff.
-operant conditioning, 209
-and social legitimacy of self, 172-181
PSYCHODYNAMICS, 93, 114, 126, 184-185, 226, 229, 235, 240, 242,
244, 247, 250, 313
-annotated-summative reports, 284ff., 291ff.
-attribution, 262ff.
-course evaluations, 283ff.
-diagnostic evaluation, 283
-DRA data samples, 293ff.
-evaluation/assessment, 283ff.
-facts, 285
-&ction 20, 262-282
-Section 21, 283-310
-student evaluation of Psychology "222" and "397, " 287ff., 290-291, 304ff.
-subjective-summative reports, 284ff.
-summative evaluations, 283ff., 309
-summative-witnessing reports, 295ff.





R (Continued)

-history, 267, 281
-management of, 201-202
-tokens, 204, 233
RELIGION, 232, 237, 258
-annotated, 135, 140, 142, 144
-catastrophe model of future-making, 245ff.
-and DRA data, 132ff.
-evaluative declarations, 284ff.
-facts, 285
-as notation system, 119
-reliability, 288ff.
-techniques for keeping track, 136, 207ff., 216ff., 219, 226, 240
-transcripts of talk, 147-150
-validity, 289
-see also: WITNESSING
-behavioral settings, 51
-group membership, 86-87
-group role, 104ff.
-Mead's treatment, 124ff.
-nestbuilding, 261a-b
-social organization, 90ff.
-status and setting, 94ff.


-aspect psychology, 255ff.
-awareness of, 220ff., 255ff., 258ff.
-biography, 124, 220
-in DRA data & witnessing, 132, 172-181
-face work, 61
-the generalized other, 125

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subiect Index (Continued)

S (Continued)

SELF (Continued)
-legitimacy of, 172-181, 220ff.
-Mead's definition, 104, 123ff., 222
-objective biography, 225ff.
-objectivity status, 124ff.
-self-delusion, 224, 230
-self-modification of behavior, 152, 209ff., 212ff., 216ff., 220ff., 230-231
-self-remembering, 225
-self-talk, 272
-the subjective "I, " 220, 223
SELF-MODIFICATION, 209ff., 212ff., 216ff., 220ff., 230-231
SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL, 63, 262, 265, 281
-relation to emotional differentiation, 65
SHAPING, 202, 211ff., 219, 233
-behavior influence, 185ff.
-praying, 238
-Section 11, 123-128
-and penetration, 50-54
-Section 2, 50-54
-and role behaviors, 90ff.
-Section 8, 90-99
SOCIETY'S WITNESSES, 121, 136-137, 189, 210, 225-226, 240-241, 320
-see also- WITNESSING

S (Continued)

SOCIODYNAMICS, 76, 80, 88, 93, 114, 121, 125, 185, 235, 242, 249
SOCIOGRAMS, 58, 104, 111
SOUL, 259-261
-conflict, 68ff.
-consciousness, 237, 240, 255ff.
-creation through interchange, 243
-ecological, 51
-Einsteinian, 313
-factors, 192
-group space, 109
-life space, 87, 235
-perceptual field, 84
-psychological, 50, 53, 80ff., 193ff., 240
-sociocultural, 92, 240
-topological, 80ff.
SPIRITUAL, 228-231, 232, 235, 237, 239-240, 246, 247, 255, 258ff.
-paradigm, 262, 281
167-169, 175ff., 224, 274
-interior dialog, 275
-value expressions, 274
-Skinner's view on, 202, 206, 208, 219, 323
-see also: ROLE

CONCORDANCE INDEX-Subject Index (Continued)

S (Continued)

SUMMATIVE EVALUATIONS (ASSESSMENTS), 96, 98, 119-120, 283ff., 309
2 -Social Distance and Penetration, 54
3-The Classification of Interpersonal Attitudes, 59
4-Behavior Influence and Personality, 66
5 -Conflict: A Field-Dynamic Concept, 72
6-(not given) (The Group as a Social Milieu)
7-Field Dynamic Theory, 88
8-Social Organization, 90-99
9-Structures of Interpersonal Relation- ships, 111
10-Community as Shared Daily Round, 121
11-Social Behaviorism, 128
12-The Nature of DRA Data: Reporting and Wltnessing, 137
13-The Daily Round Archives-DRA, 182
14-(not given) (The Social Dependency of Behavior)
15-Individual Differences and Variability, 198
16-The Community Classroom and Principles of Environmental Control, 219
17-The Evolution of Consciousness, 230-231
18-Towards a Behavioral Technology of Praying, 242
19 -Topological Applications: Future- making, 261
20-Psychodynamics-1: Attribution, 281-282
21 - Psychodynamics -2: Evaluation/ Assessment, 310

S (Continued)

SYNOPSIS (Continued)
22-Psychodynamics-3: Judgment (not given)

23-Historical Issues in Social Psychology, 324-326


-spiritual, 225
-technology of, 205ff., 219
TIME, 245, 246, 249
TOPOLOGY, 313, 314, 315, 321
-applications to future-makiIlg, 243ff.
-catastrophe theory, 243ff.
-in Lewin, 74, 80ff., 184a
-social space, 92
-topological surrealism, 255ff.
-analysis of, 278ff.
-annotation of, 147-150
-DRA data samples, 147-150


WILL, 220, 223
-and astrodynamics, 226, 229, 235
-catastrophe model of future-making, 245ff.
-community, 133, 229
-and consciousness, 240ff.
-Daily Round Archives-DRA, 140ff., 240-241

CONCORDANCE INDEX--Subject Index (Continued)

W (Continued)

WITNESSING (Continued)
-defined, 133
-DRA classification scheme, 163-165
-and DRA data, 132ff.
-DRA data samples, 144, 146-155, 167-182
-DRA Index, 156-165
-evidence and testimony, 134-142, 225, 229
-facts, 285
-interior dialog, 151
-mere witnessing, 240-241
-natural history, 119
-objectivity, 119, 125-126, 132ff., 149, 152, 200, 247, 249, 312
-objectivity issue, 284ff.
-observer of self, 116
-praying & resolutions, 250-253
-reliability & validity, 288-289
-as reporting, 119, 134, 207, 240
-Society's Witnesses, 121, 136-137, 189, 210, 225, 226
-student discharge reports, 302ff.
-as subject, 118ff.
-summative reports, 284ff.
-techniques for keeping track, 136, 226
-testimony, 134ff., 142, 225, 229
-tools of recording in science, 319ff.
-transcript annotations, 147-150
-see also- DIALY ROUND

Go Back