holism and reductionism

what is a holistic approach

any approach which emphasises the whole rather than their constituent parts

suggests there are different levels of explanation

properties of a while are said got “emerge” when two or more parts, in cooperation, do something each part cannot do on its own

explain levels of explanation

suggests that there are different ways of viewing the same phenomena in psychology

ranges from lower of fundamental level (focusing on basic componants) to those at a higher more holistic multivariable level

order of the levels from holistic to reductionist

socio-cultural

psychological

physical

environmental

physiological

neurochemical

explain OCD using the levels of explanation

socio-cultural = repetitive hand washing

psychological. = obsessive thoughts

physical = sequence of movements in washing hands

physiological = hypersensitivity of basal ganglia

neurochemical = underproduction of serationin

what is reductionism

belief that human behaviour can be explained by breaking it down into smaller component parts

looks at the very simplistic parts that make up our system, using the simplistic explanation

based on the scientific assumptions of parsimony

explain biological reductionism

based on the premise that we are all biological organisms made up of physiological structures and processes

highlights that behaviour is at some level biological and so can be explained through neurochemical, neurophysiological, evolutionary and genetic influence

explain environmental reductionism

highlights that all behaviour can be reduced to simple building blocks of S-R and that complex behaviour is a series of S-R chains

the bind is a ‘black box’ irrelevant to our understanding of behaviour

what are the evaluation points

have to understand certain behaviours in a group

holistic is too vague

reductionist forms basis of scientific research

reductionism = over simplifying

evaluation - have to understand certain behaviours in a group

P: some aspects of social behaviour only emerge within a group context and cannot be understand at the level of an individual

E: e.g. the effects of conformity to social roles and the individuation of the prisoners and guards in Zimbardo’s study

E: this phenomena could not be understood by studying behaviour of pps as individuals, it was the interaction of the group that was important

evaluation - holistic is too vague

P: holistic explanations ca be considered vague speculative and less scientific as they do not lend themselves to empirical testing

E: e.g. humanistic psychology, which takes a holistic approach to behaviour can be criticised for its lack of empirical evidence and is seen by many as a loose set of concepts

E: higher level holistic concepts pose practical problems as we accept there are multiple factors in the development of an illnuess such as depression then it is difficult to establish which is the most influential and therefore should be used as a base for therapy

L: when attempting to find solutions, lower level explanations may be more appropriate

evaluation - reductionist forms basis of scientific research

P: the reductionist approach often forms the basis of scientific research

E: in order to create operationalised variables it is necessary to break down target behaviour to it’s constituent parts

E: this makes it possible to conduct experiments and record observations (using behavioural categories) in a way that is meaningful and reliable. E.g. the behaviourist approach reducing complicit humans behaviours to simple stimulus-response.

L: this gives psychology greater credibility, placing it on equal terms with the natural sciences lower down in the reductionist hierarchy

eval - reductionism = over simplifying

P: reductionist approaches have been accused of oversimplifying leading to a loss of validity

E: explanations that focuses on genes, neurotransmitters and neurons do not include an analysis of social context within a behaviour occurs

E: e.g. the phisological process behind pointing your finder will be the same regardless of context. However it cannot explain why - e.g. to draw attention, act of aggression, to bid at an auction

L: thus reductionist explanations can only ever provide a partial explanation