Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

The Lashley-Hull debate revisited.

D Bruce1

  • 1Department of Psychology, Saint Mary's University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

History of Psychology
|October 20, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Karl Lashley and Clark Hull

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

An in-field evaluation of rapid DNA instruments for disaster victim identification.

International journal of legal medicine·2021
Same author

The management of menopausal symptoms in women following treatment for cancer at a specialist menopause service.

Post reproductive health·2021
Same author

The testosterone prescribing practice of BMS menopause specialists.

Post reproductive health·2021
Same author

Evaluation of a tertiary and district general hospital menopause service.

Post reproductive health·2020
Same author

Correction: Whole-genome sequencing of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia reveals distinct differences in the mutational landscape between IgHV<sup>mut</sup> and IgHV<sup>unmut</sup> subgroups.

Leukemia·2019
Same author

Current and emerging tools for the recovery of genetic information from post mortem samples: New directions for disaster victim identification.

Forensic science international. Genetics·2018

Area of Science:

  • Neuroscience
  • Cognitive Psychology
  • History of Psychology

Background:

  • N. Weidman (1994) posited a controversy between Karl Lashley and Clark Hull concerning brain function, mind-body relations, and machine metaphors for intelligence.
  • Published works and correspondence reveal their dispute centered on continuity in learning, stimulus generalization, and mathematical psychological theory linked to neurophysiology.
  • Weidman suggested the debate subtext was nature versus nurture; however, evidence points to Lashley's opposition to connectionism as the primary driver.

Discussion:

  • The historical record clarifies the specific scientific and theoretical disagreements between Lashley and Hull.
  • Re-evaluates Weidman's interpretation of the Lashley-Hull controversy, highlighting the primacy of learning theory and neurophysiological data.
  • Contrasts Lashley's anti-connectionist stance with Hull's theoretical framework, suggesting this as the core of their unresolved issues.

Related Experiment Videos

Key Insights:

  • The Lashley-Hull controversy was fundamentally about continuity in learning and the integration of psychological theory with neurophysiology, not a general debate on intelligence or machine metaphors.
  • Lashley's established opposition to connectionism provides a more accurate explanation for the conflict than environmental versus heredity factors.
  • The debate's focus on quantitative psychological theory and neurophysiological data underscores the early development of empirical and mathematical approaches in psychology.

Outlook:

  • Further research into archival materials could illuminate nuances in the theoretical underpinnings of Lashley's and Hull's work.
  • This re-examination encourages a more precise understanding of historical scientific debates by relying on primary source evidence.
  • Understanding the historical context of such debates informs contemporary discussions on learning, intelligence, and the biological basis of behavior.