Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A psychological analysis of observation in geology

  • Letter
  • Published:

From Nature

View current issue Submit your manuscript

Abstract

ANALYTICAL methods of experimental psychology applied to observations of geological data reveal that what geologists perceive in, and remember of, rocks is not necessarily the same as what is actually there. For example, when observing folds, professionals give more attention to antiforms than synforms and tend to remember cleavage fans as they ought to be rather than as they are.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ramsay, J. G., Folding and fracturing of rocks (McGraw Hill, New York, 1967).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. P. K. CHADWICK

    Present address: Department of Psychology, Bristol University, 8–10 Berkeley Square, Bristol, BS8 1HH, UK

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Geology, Uppsala, Sweden

    P. K. CHADWICK

Authors
  1. P. K. CHADWICK
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

CHADWICK, P. A psychological analysis of observation in geology. Nature 256, 570–573 (1975). https://doi.org/10.1038/256570a0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/256570a0

  • Springer Nature Limited

This article is cited by

Search

Navigation