For half of the twentieth century, psychology was dominated by behaviorism.  Ivan Pavlov in the early 1900s, Watson in the 1920s, and Skinner in the late 1940s directed the field and focused explicitly on how behaviors were learned through rewards and punishments.  Nevertheless, psychologists were questioning the zeitgeist of that particular period of history; Tolman in 1948 and Bandura in 1961 diverged from the norm.

The aforementioned authors were part of a handful of studies that changed psychology: Pavlov launched psychology into a true science, Watson demonstrated where emotions can come from, skinner gave us radical behaviorism, Bandura showed that behaviors can be shaped by simply observing and imitating the behaviors of others, and Tolman demonstrated that mental processes, such as cognitive learning, could be studied.  The latter two are important because most of psychology up until that point focused on behaviorism; in other words, observable behavior.  However, Tolman devised a study that helped him investigate the mind—hitherto, was rejected as a subject matter for scientific investigation.

The previous authors mentioned are some of the most well known researchers in the field of psychology.  An important point to make is that the study of behavior built on each other and each new finding.  In other words, the field progressed by incremental steps.  It could be said however, that Pavlov was the first to demonstrate that behavior could be measured and scrutinized under scientific investigation.  For much of history, a philosophical stance, which was exempt from experimentation, dominated the study of behavior.  The study of psychology in philosophical context dates back to the ancient civilizations of Egypt, Greece, China, India, and Persia.

More recently, in 1879, the true pioneer of psychology Wilhelm Wundt, founded the first laboratory dedicated to investigating behavior; however many notables from every corner of the earth began their own quest into illuminating the mystery of psychology.  In the United States, William James published his seminal book, Principles of Psychology in 1890, which became influential for many psychologists for years to come.  In spite of the long history, much of the writings on the subject matter came from philosophers.  It was not until the physiologist Ivan Pavlov came up with the idea of classical conditioning—practically by mistake—did psychology become just as measurable as the physical sciences.

Pavlov’s discovery of classical conditioned was by no means built on other psychological research.  In fact, Pavlov’s research on digestive processes—which won him a Nobel Prize—is what started his career in psychology.  He observed digestive responses that occurred during a stimulus that was unrelated to digestion.  Pavlov, being a curious man by nature, wanted to explore and explain this behavior.  Nonetheless, physiology was not going to give him the answers he was looking for; instead, he made the decision to make a risky career move: psychology.  At this point in time, psychology was still at its infancy and regarded by many as not being a true science.

If Einstein is the father of modern physics, then Pavlov is the founder of Behaviorism.  The research he conducted helped him theorize about classical conditioning.  Pavlov conducted research on unconditioned reflexes: unconditioned stimuli (UCS) can produce unconditioned responses (UCR).  How did he conclude that UCS produce UCR?  After working with dogs and the digestion system, Pavlov theorized that dogs had learned from experience to expect food after certain stimuli were presented.  More interestingly, the stimuli, which do not naturally cause salivation, were associated with food and thus had an effect on the dogs’ behavior.  In other words, conditioned reflexes could be learned through experience.  In Pavlov’s experiment, he used a metronome as a neutral stimulus and exposed the dog to the sound during time of feeding.  After repeating the procedure several times, the sound of the metronome caused the dog to start salivating.

The significance of the finding was tremendous.  It can be most exhibited through later research that built on Pavlov’s findings.  For example, Watson was able to demonstrate that emotions, such as fear, could be conditioned.  As behaviorism became a sine qua non for psychological research, Watson helped spearhead the new movement.  However, one thing that was challenging for the young movement was emotions.  How are emotions learned through conditioning? Can emotions be conditioned?  These questions were about to be answered.

Watson conducted his notorious research on a young baby called little Albert.  Furthermore, the experiment was able to demonstrate generalization.  Watson presented a loud sound—which was frightening to Albert—in conjunction with a neutral stimulus (a white rat) that did not cause fear.  During later trials, Albert had associated the rat with fear, and thus, had been emotionally conditioned to fear a once neutral stimulus.  However, that is not all Watson learned; he was able to determine that Albert generalized, although somewhat less intense, the fear of the white rat to a white bunny and the emotional response persisted over time.

Many may have argued that emotions required strictly cognitive activity, however, the aforementioned delineates any need to argue such a belief.  The case can said the same for superstition.  During the 1940s many contested that superstition was strictly human and required human cognitive activity.  However, behaviorism came to the rescue, again.

Skinner, who is famous for many things in psychology, conducted research on the matter.  He believed that superstition was caused by noncontingent reinforcement: a belief that there is a causal relationship between a behavior and a reward, but no such relationship exists.  In order to test his idea, he utilized the famous Skinner Box.  A fixed interval schedule of reinforcement delivered food (i.e., reward) to pigeons every 15 seconds.  Thereafter, trained observers  recorded the behavior of the pigeons.  Ironically, the results were very clear: the birds performed the pigeon food dance.  With all joking aside, the pigeons movements became very systematic and repetitious.  In other words, the pigeons demonstrated superstition by behaving as though there behavior was causally related to the release of the food.

Starting in the 1950s, the experimental techniques set forth by Tolman, Bandura and others became increasingly different from the norm.  The research diverged from the then current strains of thought—including psychodynamics and behaviorism—that had developed.  As mentioned, behaviorism dominated the field and left little room for others; however, cognitive psychology was starting to gain momentum.

In 1948, Tolman’s theoretical proposition was based on two premises: first, internal cognitive process could be objectively and scientifically inferred based on observation; second, in order to fully understand the process of learning, the cognitive process that co-occurs with the observable stimuli and responses must be examined.  Tolman devised the latent learning experiment and spatial orientation experiment in order to support his views.  The formal experiment demonstrated the fact that the rats were able to build up a mental map of their environment and utilize it when motivated.  The latter experiment debunked the stimulus-response theory and proved that the rats were able to utilize spatial orientation in there mental maps.

Tolmans research helped him conceptualize the mental representations—which he termed cognitive maps—that demonstrated how the mind conceptualizes present location relative to a determined location.  He expanded his research into the domain of human’s mental representations of social environments.  He concluded that narrow strip maps, in comparison to broader comprehensive maps, is a major cause for some of societies social problems.  In conclusion, Tolmans research expanded beyond cognitive mapping and became pivotal the growth of cognitive psychology and changed behavioral science forever.

In conclusion, science, and more specifically, psychology, is an enterprise that relies on past research in order to build on each other.  Nevertheless, there are those who are implemental in change, ultimately affecting the zeitgeist of that particular period of history.  In spite of the aforementioned, if one is to refute the current state of beliefs, then one must still build off of the perceived mistakes and failures of past research.  This notion that science is incremental in progress is the very building blocks that make science so grand.