New Growth from Phantom Limbs

Tenuous Attributions to Our Predecessors
Part of the Path in Psychology book series (PATH)


Experimental Psychology American Psychology Moral Philosophy Oral Tradition Phantom Limb 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bacon, F. (1620/1861). Aphorisms concerning the interpretation of nature and the kingdom of man, Aphorism, XLV in Robert Leslie Ellis and James Spedding, Tr, The Philosophical Works of Francis Bacon., vol. iv. London.Google Scholar
  2. Boring, E. G. (1950). Great men and scientific progress. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association, 94, 339–351.Google Scholar
  3. Bryson, G. (1932). The comparable interests of the old moral philosophy and the modern social sciences. Social Forces, 10, 20–21 Bryson, G. (1932). The emergence of the social sciences from moral philosophy. International Journal of Ethics, 42, 304–323.Google Scholar
  4. Cattell, J. McK. (1896). Address of the president before the American psychological association, 1895.” Psychological Review, 3, 134–148; Reprinted in James McKeen Cattell: Man of Science. Lancaster:Pa.: Science Press, 1947, 52–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cattell, J. McK. (1898) The advance of psychology. Proceedings of the American Associaton for the Advancement of Science, 47, Reprinted in James McKeen Cattell: Man of Science, Lancaster Pa.: Science Press, 1947, 4.Google Scholar
  6. Cattell, J. McK. (1929). Psychology in America. Proceedings and Papers: Ninth International Congress of Psychology. Princeton: Psychological Review Company, 12.Google Scholar
  7. Danziger, K. (1979). Social Origins of Modern Psychology, in Allan R. Buss, ed., Psychology in Social Context. New York: Irvington Publishers, Inc., 1979, 27–45.Google Scholar
  8. Evans, R. B. (1984). Origins of American academic psychology, in Josef Brozek, ed., Explorations in the History of Psychology in the United States. Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 17–48.Google Scholar
  9. Evans, R. B. and Scott, F.J.D (1978). The 1913 International Congress of Psychology: The American Congress that Wasn’t,“ American Psychologist, 33, 711–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hall, G. S. (1887a). Review of James McCosh, Psychology. The cognitive powers, American Journal of Psychology, 1, 146.Google Scholar
  11. Hall, G. S. (1887b). Review of Borden P. Bowne, Introduction to psychological theory, American Journal of Psychology, 1, 149.Google Scholar
  12. Hall, G. S. (1887c). Review of G. T. Ladd, Elements of physiological psychology, American Journal of Psychology I, 159.Google Scholar
  13. Hall, G. S. (1895) Review of G. T. Ladd, Psychology, descriptive and explanatory, American Journal of Psychology, 6, 477.Google Scholar
  14. Hall, G. S. (1892). Review of William James, Principles of Psychology, American Journal of Psychology, 3, 551, 558.Google Scholar
  15. Münsterberg, H. (1909) Letter to J. McK. Cattell, 9 August, 1909, Cattell Papers, Library of Congress.Google Scholar
  16. Ross, D. (1972). G. Stanley Hall: The Psychologist as Prophet. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Snow, L. F. (1907). The College Curriculum in the United States. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  18. Titchener, E. B. (1918). Letter to Adolf Meyer, April 29, 1918. Reprinted in Ruth Leys and Rand B. Evans, Eds., Defining American Psychology: The Correspondence between Adolf Meyer and Edward Bradford Titchener. Baltimore; Johns Hopkins University Press, 1990, p. 215.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations