The Production, Detection, and Explanation of Behavioral Patterns

  • Warren Thorngate
Part of the Perspectives on Individual Differences book series (PIDF)

Abstract

The essence of science is the detection and explanation of patterns. Physical scientists devote themselves to the detection and explanation of patterns of matter and energy. Biological scientists are concerned with patterns of life. And behavioral scientists are concerned with patterns of human behavior and experience. Despite the differences in subject matter, all attempt to discern regularities in their domains and to analyze why these regularities occur. Few, if any, attempts are made to study irregular or patternless phenomena. Accidents and other unique events are sometimes investigated by scientific means if deemed sufficiently important (e.g., determining a cause of death, a disputed authorship, or the trajectory of an epidemic), and if they can be viewed as products of regularities or patterns. But phenomena that exhibit no discernible regularity or pattern are relegated to the status of anecdote, transience, chaos, or noise. They are acknowledged in statistics by a concept known as error. And they are assumed, by tradition if not definition, to lie outside the domain of scientific enquiry.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bakan, D. (1954). A generalization of Sidman’s results on group and individual functions, and a criterion. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 63–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bern, D., & Allen, A. (1974). On predicting some of the people some of the time: The search for cross-situational consistencies in behavior. Psychological Review, 81, 506–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chaitin, G. (1974). Information-theoretic limitations of formal systems. Journal of the Association of Computing Machinery, 21, 403–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dabrowski, K. (1964). Positive disintegration. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  5. Dobzhansky, T., Ayala, F., Stebbins, G., & Valentine, J. (1977). Evolution. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  6. Einhorn, H., & Hogarth, R. (1981). Behavioral decision theory: Processes of judgment and choice. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 53–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Feldman, S. (1966). Cognitive consistency. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1980). Knowing what you want: Measuring labile values. In T. Wallston (Ed.), Cognitive processes in choice and decision behavior (pp. 117–141). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Gleick, J. (1984, June 10). Solving the mathematical riddle of chaos. New York Times Magazine, pp. 31-32ff.Google Scholar
  10. Hogarth, R. (1982). On the surprise and delight of inconsistent responses. In R. Hogarth (Ed.), New directions for methodology of social and behavioral science: Question framing and response consistency (pp. 3–20). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  11. Holling, C. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Katz, F. (1974). Indeterminary in the structure of systems. Behavioral Science, 19, 394–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kirk, R. (1968). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  14. Langmuir, I. (1943). Science, common sense and decency. Science, 97, 1–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Levins, R. (1966). The strategy of model building in population biology. American Scientist, 54, 421–431.Google Scholar
  16. London, I. (1946). Some consequences for history and psychology of Langmuir’s concept of convergence and divergence of phenomena. Psychological Review, 53, 170–188.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. London, I. D. (1949). The developing person as a function of convergence and divergence. Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 167–187.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. London, I. D. (1974). The revenge of heaven: A brief methodological account. Psychological Reports, 34, 1023–1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. London, I. D. (1975). Interviewing in sinology: Observations on methods and fundamental concepts. Psychological Reports, 36, 683–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. London, I. D. & London, M. (1959). A case study of the reliability of research on foreign peoples. Psychological Reports, 5, 36–69.Google Scholar
  21. London, I., & Thorngate, W. (1981). Divergent amplification and social behavior: Some methodological considerations. Psychological Reports, 48, 203–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Luce, D. (1959). Individual choice behavior. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  23. May, R. (1976). Simple mathematical models with very complicated dynamics. Nature, 261, 459–467.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Maynard-Smith, J. (1958). The theory of evolution. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  25. Mitroff, I., & Featheringham, T. (1974). On systematic problem solving and the error of the third kind. Behavioral Science, 19, 383–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nagao, D., & Davis, J. (1980). Some implications of temporal drift in social parameters. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 479–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Newell, A. (1973). You can’t play 20 questions with nature and win. In W. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 283–308). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  28. Payne, J. (1976). Task complexity and contingent processing in decision making: An information search and protocol analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 366–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pielou, E. (1969). An introduction to mathematical ecology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  30. Poole, R. (1977). Periodic, pseudoperiodic and chaotic population fluxuations. Ecology, 58, 210–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Powers, W. (1978). Quantitative analysis of purposive systems: Some spadework at the foundations of scientific psychology. Psychological Review, 85, 417–435.Google Scholar
  32. Prigogine, I. (1980). From being to becoming. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  33. Robinson, W. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15, 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sidman, M. (1952). A note on functional relations obtained from group data. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 263–269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thomgate, W. (1975). Process invariance: Another red herring. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1, 485–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thomgate, W. (1976). Possible limits on a science of social behavior. In L. Strickland, F. Abound, & K. Gergen (Eds.), Social psychology in transition (pp. 121–139). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Thomgate, W., & Maki, J. (1976). Decision heuristics and the choice of political candidates (Report 76-1). Edmonton: University of Alberta, Social Psychology Labs.Google Scholar
  38. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wilson, K. (1973). Linear regression equations as behavior models. In J. Royce (Ed.), Multivariate analysis and psychological theory (pp. 45–73). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Warren Thorngate
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations