Abstract

This essay briefly describes behaviorism, gestalt, and structuralism. Brief examples of each approach are outlined under each topic. The common threads of behaviorism, gestalt, and structuralism are contrasted and compared in basic terms, and their influence on present-day psychology is discussed.

Unit 1 – Individual Project
This paper discusses three methods in the evolution of psychology: structuralism, behaviorism, and gestalt. To better understand the concepts of each, it’s important to list examples of each method, as well as compare and contrast the differences of each and how each impact modern-day psychology.

Structuralism
The structural approach to psychology sought to quantify the human experience, the human mind, in a scientific way (Reed, 2010). Simply put, structuralism is the study of how people respond to stimuli; it’s the study of human perception (Education Portal, 2012). It was thought that, through the process of Introspection, surface behavior held clues to deeply buried issues that could only be identified by the therapist (Narrative Therapy Chicago, 2012).
An example of structuralism, with regard to therapy, was the use of Introspection, wherein the therapist would, for example, play a sound, or ask the patient to jump in the air. He would then observe the reaction to the stimuli, and ask, “How does that make you feel?” Between the unconscious reaction and introspective response of the patient, the therapist believed he could uncover clues to the patient’s problem.
Behaviorism
Behaviorism asserts that conditioning the root cause of all behavior, parting from the idea that psychology is a science of behavior, not a science of the mind (Graham, 2010). In other words, behavior is a product of environment, not a product of the mind (Graham, 2010). Behaviorists believe that, as conditioning was the root of all action, people