Abstract
This research examines the employment of cognitive or mentalist words in the titles of articles from three comparative psychology journals (Journal of Comparative Psychology, International Journal of Comparative Psychology, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes; 8,572 titles, >100,000 words). The Dictionary of Affect in Language, coupled with a word search of titles, was employed to demonstrate cognitive creep. The use of cognitive terminology increased over time (1940–2010) and the increase was especially notable in comparison to the use of behavioral words, highlighting a progressively cognitivist approach to comparative research. Problems associated with the use of cognitive terminology in this domain include a lack of operationalization and a lack of portability. There were stylistic differences among journals including an increased use of words rated as pleasant and concrete across years for Journal of Comparative Psychology, and a greater use of emotionally unpleasant and concrete words in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes.
Highlights
IntroductionPsychology is currently defined, for those not familiar with it, as “the study of mind and behavior”(by the American Psychological Association [1]) or the “scientific study of behavior and mental processes” (in an introductory psychology text [2])
Psychology is currently defined, for those not familiar with it, as “the study of mind and behavior”(by the American Psychological Association [1]) or the “scientific study of behavior and mental processes”
The use of cognitive terminology increased over time (1940–2010) and the increase was especially notable in comparison to the use of behavioral words, highlighting a progressively cognitivist approach to comparative research
Summary
Psychology is currently defined, for those not familiar with it, as “the study of mind and behavior”(by the American Psychological Association [1]) or the “scientific study of behavior and mental processes” (in an introductory psychology text [2]). Each of psychology’s two accredited founders dwelt on the importance of mental processes: Wundt favored introspection as an experimental technique while James wrote at length on the topic of consciousness [2]. These approaches were challenged by Watson [3] who repudiated both introspection and consciousness in his flagship article “Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It”. Skinner [4] insisted that mentalist terms fail to explain behavior and interfere with approaches that might explain it successfully He viewed the two-part definition of psychology as an unworthy compromise reached in an attempt to sell more textbooks [4]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
