Traditionally, developmental psychology has been characterized by two approaches, one predominantly social and the other, cognitive. Despite this separatism, develop-mentalists have expressed the need for a better understanding of how these two facets of the person interact - a need for a better account of development within the person as a whole. However, such an integration has been difficult given the incompatibility of underlying assumptions guiding these two areas of inquiry. James Mark Baldwin's integration of social and cognitive development into (...) one theory highlights the utility of historical analyses for further progress in the field. In this paper, Baldwin's dialectical theory of personal growth is placed in historical context, highlighting similarities and differences between his approach and that taken by Piaget, and the legacy of his theory in current theory and research. The importance of self, the development of knowledge in the context of social relationships and the function of imitation are emphasized. (shrink)

According to the majority of the textbooks, the history of modern, scientific psychology can be tidily encapsulated in the following three stages. Scientific psychology began with a commitment to the study of mind, but based on the method of introspection. Watson rejected introspectionism as both unreliable and effete, and redefined psychology, instead, as the science of behaviour. The cognitive revolution, in turn, replaced the mind as the subject of study, and rejected both behaviourism and a reliance on introspection. This paper (...) argues that all three stages of this history are largely mythical. Introspectionism was never a dominant movement within modern psychology, and the method of introspection never went away. Furthermore, this version of psychology’s history obscures some deep conceptual problems, not least surrounding the modern conception of “behaviour,” that continues to make the scientific study of consciousness seem so weird. (shrink)