···
Kent McClelland (2017.11.26 17:30)–
KM: I coined the term âperceptual control theoryâ? for a conference paper that I presented at the first CSG Annual Meeting I attended back in 1991, and later, after a good deal of back-and-forth on CSGnet, the people actively involved in the debate
decided to adopt PCT as the âofficialâ? label.Â
KM: Gary Cziko, as I recall, was the most strenuous advocate for the PCT label.
RM: I was a strong advocate for it as well, I think. It’s really the best name to distinguish Powers’ Control Theory (also PCT) from all the other applications of control theory in psychology (applications I refer to as “manual control theories”).Â
Â
KM: Bill Powers favored the label âhierarchical control theoryâ?, which I opposed because I thought would be a complete nonstarter among sociologists and other social scientists.
RM: I also think it doesn’t capture what is most important (and distinctive) about Bill’s theory. There are other hierarchical theories that probably think of themselves as control theories but there is only one theory that makes it clear that behavior (controlling) is organized around the control of perceptual input variables: the theory formerly known as PCT.
KM: Clark McPhail, a sociologist who was an proponent of the theory at that time (although he has since renounced it) preferred the name âperception control theoryâ? and used that label in some of the things he published. Â
RM:Do you know why?
Â
KM: I would agree that the PCT label has had some disadvantages, even suggesting to some people, perhaps, that weâre just talking about mind control or controlling things by brainwaves, or something like that.Â
RM: Or that it is only perception – and nothing out in the world --Â that is being controlled when we behave.
KM: And I would agree that the name âinput control theoryâ? has some attractive features. But I would caution against any attempt to quickly relabel the theory without thinking through the possible disadvantages of this new coinage. One possible disadvantage
that occurs to me is that IPT may make the theory sound even more mechanical than PCT, by suggesting that weâre talking about something like the control of computer input. The computer metaphor for the brain has been a great stumbling block, in my view, to
understanding how human intelligence works.Â
RM: Of course. There is no going back now. Powers’ theory is known internationally now as PCT and I do think PCT is the best name for Bill’s theory. And, as you note, ICT has it’s own problems (not the least being that I always type it as IPT, just as you did;-) So I’ll live with PCT. But I did want to acknowledge Fred’s great idea. For a psychologist like me, trained in perception, “control of perception” and “control of input” mean pretty much the same thing. But for people not trained in perception “control of perception” can mean many things other than what it actually means in the theory.
Best
Rick
Â
Best to all,
Kent
On Nov 26, 2017, at 4:04 PM, Warren Mansell wmansell@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Rick, I agree with both of you that Input Control Theory would be more accurate and lead to less misunderstandings too! Although some others on CSGNet may be able to remind us of the advantages of the word ‘perceptual’ maybe? Also,
whether we can reverse the behemoth of a name now is questionable! I will try to get this angle into my next papers anyway…
Warren
–
Richard S. MarkenÂ
"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.â?
                --Antoine de Saint-Exupery
On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Richard Marken
rsmarken@gmail.com wrote:
[From Rick Marken (2017.11.26.1350)]
–
Dr Warren Mansell
Reader in Clinical Psychology
School of Health Sciences
2nd Floor Zochonis Building
University of Manchester
Oxford Road
Manchester M13 9PL
Email:
warren.mansell@manchester.ac.uk
Â
Tel: +44 (0) 161 275 8589
Â
Website:
http://www.psych-sci.manchester.ac.uk/staff/131406
Â
Advanced notice of a new transdiagnostic therapy manual, authored by Carey, Mansell & Tai -
Principles-Based Counselling and Psychotherapy: A Method of Levels Approach
Available Now
Check
www.pctweb.org for further information on Perceptual Control Theory
 Fred Nickols (2017.11.26.1430 ET)–Â
Â
FN: For reasons I will explain shortly, I have decided to use Input Control Theory instead of Perceptual Control Theory in conversations with those not yet informed about PCT. Now the explanation.
RM: I completely agree with this Fred! I think referring to Bill’s theory as
Perceptual Control Theory has created no end of problems. While it is certainly an accurate term, calling Bill’s theory PCT gives the wrong impression to many people of what Powers’ theory is about. Indeed, many of the disagreements we have
on CSGNet are based on a misunderstanding of what Powers’ theory is about based on the name that has been used to distinguish it from other applications of control theory to understanding behavior. So from now on I will refer to Powers’ application of control
theory as Input Control Theory (IPT).Â
RM: So long live IPT, the theory formerly known as PCT.Â
BestÂ
Rick
Â
Â
One of the famous figures in the field of human performance is Robert F. Mager. Mager is noted for giving draft versions of his papers and books to his children to read and then discussing with them their reactions. The end result has
been an unparalleled streak of easily read materials that successful communicated some very complex concepts.
Â
Today, my wife read Rupertâs one-page on PCT. She struggled with âperceptual.â To her, âperceptionâ? refers to the way she sees things and her perceptions of this or that are unique to her, a product of her life and its history. Even
after working through some examples (e.g., driving, relocating an afghan, turning up or down the heat), she struggled with âperceptualâ? and the notion of controlling her perceptions. She said simply that her perceptions are what they are (going back to the
notion of the way she sees things).
Â
However, as we dug deeper into the driving example and the issue of keeping the car in its lane, she understood that she was able to do so on the basis of what she could see, mentioning the alignment between the hood ornament and the center
of the lane. My wifeâs definition of âperceptionâ? is quite consistent with what I know to be the definition of many others. I think its use poses a stumbling block to getting people to understand that behavior is the control of perception. However, Iâm
betting that those same people, including my wife, will have no difficulty whatsoever in understanding that their behavior controls their inputs. In my wifeâs case, she readily agreed that her steering behavior affected what she sees while driving.
Â
I recall reading in PCT materials on more than one occasion, that the basic premise of PCT is that we act to control inputs, not outputs.
Â
Fred NickolsÂ
Richard S. MarkenÂ
"Perfection is achieved not when you have nothing more to add, but when you
have nothing left to take away.â?
                --Antoine de Saint-Exupery
–