If we use the Google search engine and type in the phrase ‘the father of cognitive psychology’, one name pops up – Ulric (Dick) Neisser.  (www.google.com)  This title is a great honor, but what does it mean to be a father, exactly?  From a biological standpoint, a father provides a seed which will one day produce an offspring.  But a true father is so much more than a seed bearer.  He is a leader, a provider, and a protector.  Using these three attributes and applying them to the professional life of Neisser, we will see that ‘father of cognitive psychology’ is a fitting title for this man.

Personal and Professional Life

            Neisser was born on December 28, 1928 in Kiel, Germany, but his family moved to the United States in 1933 as they feared for their safety under Hitler and the Nazis. (http://www.psychologicalscience.org/images/neisser-timeline-for-web.jpg).  He began his college career at Harvard by studying physics, but switched to psychology and earned his B.A. in 1950. (Neisser, 2003)  He went on to earn his Master’s Degree at Swarthmore College in 1952, where he worked with Gestalt psychologist Wolfgang Kohler and his assistant Hans Wallach.  He earned his Ph.D. at Harvard in 1956, working with S.S. Stevens and studying auditory perception. (http://www.psychologicalscience.org/images/neisser-timeline-for-web.jpg).  In 1957, he joined the faculty at Brandeis University.  He worked there until 1983, when he transferred to Emory University.  He remained at Emory University until his retirement in 1996.  After retiring, he worked for Cornell as an emeritus faculty member. He passed away on February 17, 2012 in Ithaca, New York. 

          Neisser earned the title ‘father of cognitive psychology’ in 1967, when he published Cognitive Psychology.  In Neisser (2000a), Theodore Parks says this about him:

Back in the 1960s, a number of people were working on specific lines of research that were to define the core of this new field, but it was he who put all their efforts together in what is undoubtedly the first major book on the subject and gave the field its name:  Cognitive Psychology (p. 75)  

       According to Ira Hyman, Neisser was a clear and persuasive writer who was able to synthesize diverse ideas and research findings. (http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2012/

may-june-12/remembering-the-father-of-cognitive-psychology.html).  As a researcher, he was creative and continually attempted to invent new ways to explore important ideas.  More importantly, he was a revolutionary who fought for the underdog, advocated for ecological approaches to cognitive research, and was determined to move psychology in a new direction.  Neisser himself admitted that Cognitive Psychology was an attack on behaviorism, although the book itself did not directly challenge the approach but rather presented an attractive alternative.  The way he saw it, behaviorist assumptions were wrong and those assumptions limited psychological study.  What the book did was collectively display research concerning perception, pattern recognition, attention, problem solving, and remembering; and it looked at these ideas through both information processing and constructive processing. 

 

Cognitive Psychology

            Cognitive psychology, as a scientific discipline, involves itself with studying the mind and mental functions.  (http://psych.rutgers.edu/menu-iv/co).  It is based on the assumption that the brain can be understood as a complex computing system.   The mental functions most often studied are memory, language, attention, perception, learning, conceptual development, reasoning, and decision making.  Regarding its connection to educational practice, Roediger (2013) points out five educational practices that were shown not only to be effective but also general enough that they can be used in a wide array of disciplines.  They include (1) distributing practice on tasks, (2) retrieval practice (i.e. testing), (3) interleaved practice (where practice for one topic is interwoven within practice for other topics), (4) elaborative interrogation (where learners explain to themselves why the information is true), and (5) self-explanation (where learners explain a procedure or process to themselves).   Kuhn and Dean (2004) add to this idea by stating that metacognition, inquiry and debate are cognitive skills that should be developed in the learner so they can be responsible members of a democratic society.

 

Neisser’s Work

            I was able to read and examine eight writings by Neisser.  As I studied them, it became clear to me that he truly is the father of cognitive psychology.  As a leader, he was able to take all the available individual theories and studies in cognitive psychology and tie them into a cohesive whole.  We see this most greatly in Cognitive Psychology, whose first and last chapters appear in Munger’s The history of psychology:  Fundamental Questions (Neisser, 2003).  In these chapters, Neisser looks comprehensively at the various components of cognitive psychology, addressing the subjects of cognitive and dynamic memory, memory and thought, the Reappearance and Utilization hypotheses, cognitive structures, the problem of the executive, the multiplicity of thought, and primary & secondary processes.  In each of these components, Neisser is careful to discuss and critique the prevailing assumptions and research.  In addition to all of this, Neisser intersperses his ideas as to why behaviorism is not able to adequately handle these concepts.  In another of his works, Neisser discusses pattern recognition. (Neisser, 2004b)  He gives a clear and comprehensive view of the issue and attempts to address any unanswered questions by looking at the issue from every angle and by addressing every possible tie-in.  In addition, he answers questions posed about pattern recognition, but also points to the limitations of those answers.  For example, he poses the question, “How does the subject know an A when he sees one?” (Neisser, 2004b, p. 125)  He then goes on to explain that the obvious answer (that it looks like an A) is erroneous because all A’s do not look alike.  The next answer involves classification, to which Neisser points out that a mechanism of classification must be put into place.  Before delving into the issue further, Neisser pauses to identify the equivalent problem in terms of behaviorism (stimulus generalization or stimulus equivalence) and Gestalt psychology (contact between perceptual process and memory).  In a third work, Neisser (2004a) looks back over his professional career to examine the progress made in cognitive psychology with regard to memory development.  Neisser begins this article by looking all the way back to Freud and his concept of ‘infantile amnesia’.  He then takes the reader chronologically through the works of many different researchers, ending with Eacott and Crawley’s work in 1998.

            As a provider for cognitive psychology, he again does a great job.  In Remembering Life Experiences, Neisser is careful to give the reader the goal of the chapter, various definitions and issues, other psychologists’ contribution to the subject, and a summary paragraph at the end of the piece. (Neisser & Libby, 2000)  Moreover, Neisser takes the time to break this very large subject into six smaller parts, with each of those parts having 3 to 6 subsections.  This allowed the reader to take the information in bite size chunks, which is especially important here as Neisser’s prose is rich with information and therefore a bit hard to read.  In a second article entitled Jane Doe’s Memories: Changing the Past to Serve the Present, Neisser takes an in depth look at one case study in which a seventeen year old girl has a false memory and also a distorted memory of known child abuse that occurred when she was six years old. (Neisser, 1997)  Neisser takes the time to acquaint the reader with the overall situation before going into his discourse as to why the young woman might have false and distorted memories.  After examining the situation fully, Neisser wraps up the article by listing some of the lessons that can be learned from this case study.  In another article, which was a review, Neisser looks at perception and its effects not only on memory but on persuasion. (Neisser, 2004c)  This work examines two different books written about the Pioneer Fund, one of which was very flattering to the researchers and their work from the Pioneer Fund and another which was written as an expose’ of their overtly racial activities and influence.  In this work, Neisser’s overall question is, “Can they both be right?”  He then spends the duration of the article explaining why they both could be right, with the conclusion being that they were looking at different aspects of the same institution.  This work was particularly interesting because Neisser moves effortlessly back and forth between the two works as he compares their very different conclusions. 

            As a protector, Neisser is top notch.  We can see this very plainly in two of the critiques he has written. In the first and milder critique, Neisser reviews a book about the Black-White test score gap.  (Neisser, 2000b).  While discussing the ideas presented in the book, he gently encourages us to admit that we don’t even know very much about this issue.  He then not so gently goes after some of the misconceptions and omissions presented in some of the submissions to this edited work which might lead the reader to make an erroneous conclusion.  At the end of this article and after arguing his point with solid evidence, Neisser makes the simple conclusion that the gaps in test scores are a factor of culture, not race.  It is important to note here that Neisser thought the book was informative overall, but he went after the falsehoods contained in it.  In a second writing, Neisser (2000a) is not so gentle about protecting his readers from developing false conclusions.  He writes a chapter called Admirably adaptive, occasionally intelligent, where he looks at some of the claims others have made about the intelligence of vision.  The first two sentences of this work set the tone for what the reader will see: 

The chief reason why Irvin Rock and Richard Gregory want to call vision intelligent is probably because they admire it so much.  “Intelligent” is a compliment. (I think this is the chief reason, because – as we shall see – their other arguments aren’t strong.  (p. 75)

He then goes after the first person’s arguments by showing that the examples he gives are actually counterproductive to his argument, and shows the fallacy of one of his arguments outright (which if it was correct, would make flies intelligent problem-solvers).  As for the second person, Neisser is a bit less stern, although he still points out difficulties.  He points out that one of problems occurs when he attempts to make a general case specific.  He then goes after the man’s model by stating this:

 I have been criticizing models of this sort for some 20 years but will resist the temptation to do so here (Neisser 1976).  There’s no need to beat this particular horse any longer.  It’s quite dead. (p. 78) 

He ends his critique by stating this man does make a good point about picture perception.  In this particular piece, Neisser ends by listing the things that cognitive scientists do know about vision and intelligence. After looking at the available evidence, Neisser concludes that the subsystems involved in vision are not necessarily intelligent but that they are just going along doing what they do, with a note that picture perception would be the exception.

            Looking back, Neisser helped define the platform on which cognitive psychology rests.  This platform views the mind as a complex system capable of intelligent and creative thought.  He then helped to shape what this platform holds, like memory, perception, learning, and reasoning.  Of all his contemporaries, it seems that he was the one able to develop the structure and cohesiveness of the subject and to protect it from intellectual harm.  And as a cognitive psychologist and educator himself, he also conducted research and educated many in order to advance the field.

 

References

http://www.psychologicalscience.org/images/neisser-timeline-for-web.jpg

 

http://psych.rutgers.edu/menu-iv/co

 

https://www.google.com/search?

 

rlz=1C2VSNA_enUS624US624&newwindow=1&site=&source=hp&q=

the+father+of+cognitive+psychology&oq=The+father+of+cognitive+&gs_l=hp.1.0.0j0i22i30l7.4471290.4477580.0.4480424.25.21.0.4.4.0.230.2179.13j7j1.21.0.msedr...0...1c.1.62.hp..1.24.1973.0.uBROwGZD_Uk

 

Kuhn, D. & Dean, D. Jr. (2004).  Metacognition: A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice.  Theory into Practice, 43(4), 268-273.  Retrieved from http://scholar.google.com/ scholar_url?

 

url=http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Deanna_Kuhn/publication/232869320_Metacognition_A_Bridge_Between_Cognitive_Psychology_and_Educational_Practice/links/02e7e525317acd6d6a000000.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm3Cdspgm4nMSd-CMcA3hpJsKbKfyQ&nossl=1&oi=scholarr

 

Neisser, U. (1997). Jane Doe’s memories:  Changing the past to serve the present.  Child Maltreatment 2(2), 123-125.

 

Neisser, U. (2000a). Admirably adaptive, occasionally intelligent. In T. Parks (Ed.). Looking at looking.

 

An introduction to the intelligence of vision. (pp. 75-80). Thousand Oaks, CA:  Sage Publications.

 

Neisser, U. (2000b). A hard look at a hard problem. Psyccritiques 45(1), 75-78.

 

Neisser, U. (2003).  Cognitive psychology. In M. Munger (Ed.) The history of psychology:  Fundamental Questions (pp. 447-466). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

 

Neisser, U. (2004a). Memory development:  New questions and old.  Developmental Review 24, 154-158. doi:  10.1016/j.dr.2003.09.002

 

Neisser, U. (2004b). Pattern Recognition. In D. Barlota and E. J. Marsh (Eds.) Cognitive psychology: Key readings.  (pp. 125-150).  New York, NY:  Psychology Press.

 

Neisser, U. (2004c).  “Serious scientists of disgusting racists?”.  Psyccritiques 49(1) 5-7.

 

Neisser, U. & Libby, L. K.  (2000). Remembering Life Experiences. In E. Tulving and F. Craik (Eds.)

 

The Oxford handbook of memory.  (pp. 315-332).  New York, NY:  Oxford University Press.

 

Roediger, H.L. III (2013).  Applying cognitive psychology to education:  Translational educational science.  Association for Psychological Science, 14(1), 1-3.  doi:  10.1177/1529100612454415