Divergent perspective?

[from Jeff Vancouver (2000.12.7.1310)]

A friend forwarded this to me. I thought some might find it interesting. I
am currently working on a model (in Vensim) that combines the Brunswikian
approach with the PCT approach. I hope to seek some comments on it soon.
Anyway, I was not aware that the Brunswikian approach was as potentially
simpathetic as this summary suggests. We shall see.

Jeff

···

************************************************************
The following research summary was prepared for the Brunswik
Society Newsletter. Please note the final deadline for
submissions to the newsletter is December 8, 2000.
You are welcome to post research summaries to the Brunswik
e-mail list at any time.
************************************************************

Culminations, 2000

Ken Hammond (Boulder, CO)

The year 2000 has been an active one for me. My book
"Judgments Under Stress" (Oxford) was published in January,
on my 83rd birthday [almost]. Although I have not yet seen
any reviews, I am pleased with this book because it fulfills
a long standing aim: to work out an application of
Brunswikian theory to an important area of J/DM.

I chose the area of the effect of stress on judgment because
it presents a central topic of both theoretical and practical
importance that can hardly be over-estimated. In addition,
it is one that I have long believed represented an excellent
example of psychological research at its worst; that is, the
repeated effort application of the "find the effect of a
variable" paradigm, leaving every conclusion contingent upon
a limited set of conditions.

So, in an attempt to demonstrate how Brunswikian psychology
can produce a new, different, and productive approach, I
present in this book a conception of stress derived from
Brunswik's emphasis on the theory of constancy as "the
essence of life" (1956, p23). From that standpoint, the
disruption of constancy "presents a threat to the organism
that induces not merely an affective response but a cognitive
one" (Hammond, 2000, p 69).

I insist that this point of departure is a solid one (in
contrast to conventional work) based as it is on an empirical
discovery (constancy) that represents not only a miraculous
organismic achievement but is apparent throughout the animal
world.

But for those who would prefer to stand on the accomplishments
of current and past stress research I include for their
evaluation an extensive annotated bibliography of this work,
which I claim to be useless. In short, I offer a Brunswikian
framework as a new point of departure for theory and research
on stress-related judgments. Perhaps it will serve as a model
for applications of Brunswikian theory to other areas, long
smothered by conventional research methods.

A second publishing event occurred in 2000 that fulfilled
another of my long-standing goals, no, dreams, and that was
the completion of the preparation of Brunswik's English-
language papers for publication. These are to be included
in a book titled "The Essential Brunswik: Beginnings,
explications, applications" (Oxford).
(see Essential Brunswik--Contents)

The book manuscript is now in its final stages of production
and will appear in 2001. It should provide ready access to
original sources for Brunswikian researchers, something that
has been lacking for nearly a half century. Those interested
in Brunswikian theory and research will no longer have to be
satisfied with secondary sources.

This work was carried out in collaboration with Tom Stewart,
without whom this project would never have got off the ground,
or seen the light of day. He did the hard, detailed work of
gaining the cooperation of 29 authors, not including ourselves,
and putting all of the 48 chapters together in a sensible form.
Most important, he saw the preparation through to its conclusion,
despite the obstacles and frustrations that efforts of this kind
inevitably encounter. I suggest that at the next meeting of the
Brunswik Society, Tom be given a medal in the form of a gold
embossed lens model (of course).

I was happy to see that in 2000 Oxford saw fit to bring out a
paperback copy of my "Human Judgment and Social Policy" book.

Currently I am at work on a book manuscript to be titled "Human
Judgment in the Information Age: Getting better - or worse?" It
is intended for the "trade" market. I am roughly half-way to
reaching my goal.

krhammond@earthlink.net

-------------------
BRUNSWIK mailing list (brunswik@listserv.albany.edu)
Brunswik Society web site: http://brunswik.org/
For archives of the Brunswik list, to join or leave the list,
or to change your subscription options:
http://listserv.albany.edu:8080/archives/brunswik.html
For information, email info@brunswik.org
-------------------

[From Rick Marken (2000.12.07.1230)]

Jeff Vancouver (2000.12.7.1310)--

I am currently working on a model (in Vensim) that combines
the Brunswikian approach with the PCT approach. I hope to
seek some comments on it soon. Anyway, I was not aware that
the Brunswikian approach was as potentially simpathetic as
this summary suggests. We shall see.

We already have. Powers mentioned Brunswick's "lens model"
in B:CP. Brunswick saw one aspect of the phenomenon of
control: variable means used to produce a consistent
("constant" in Hammond's terminology) behavioral result.
But Brunswick didn't understand what this meant (it means that
behavior is purposeful) or how it works (it works by closed
loop control of perceptual input).

Brunswick's "lens model" is like Skinner's concept of "operant":
it describes a phenomenon (variable acts "focused" into a single,
constant result) but it doesn't explain it. So Brunswick's
approach is no more "sympathetic" to PCT than is Skinner's.
If anything, it works the other way around. The PCT approach is
"sympathetic" to Brunswick's and Skinner's approach because
it helps us understand why people like Brunswick and Skinner
would observe this apparently "magical" phenomenon (because
organisms must vary their actions to produce constant results
when there are disturbances to those results) and it explains
what they actually saw (control of perception).

Best

Rick

···

--
Richard S. Marken Phone or Fax: 310 474-0313
MindReadings.com mailto: marken@mindreadings.com
www.mindreadings.com