Not my subject matter at all, and not well informed about Lewin's field theory, but intriguing nevertheless.

And... in a single example, say field observations about predation, could you explain first what field theory would have to offer and second what would falsify it?

Joris,

the field theory of Levin is interesting, because the physical field expression (magnetic field, electric field) was transformed by him into the psychological context. Objects or persons are attractive or dangerous (repulsive) or even neutral. A person feels such influences as psychological forces (like in physics) and has to react to this forces.

Normally a person acts not like an amoeba to such forces, which determines their path. This path would be similar to the trajectory of a ball on an elastic surface with deep holes, made by heavy (attractive) objects and also hills with aversive areas.

We can switch on or of the influence of such objects in the mind if they are not so important for us but what is with animals? Are they like such a ball? We could easily understand the acting agent and would be able to predict the trajectory on such a rubber surface very simply.

What would falsify this idea? I do not know - do you? We are not able to analyse what's going on in a mind. So any arguments pro and contra would be weak. Naturally there are no physical forces in the brain. There are some mechanisms to move and to chose the direction of the movement and there are also some motives to reach a goal or to avoid something else. I think the idea of Levin is very clever and simple, it could not be so wrong.

Hi Wilfred,

I would say read about goal directed behavior, such as predation, and see if you can find some clues. As a rule there is more to behavior than meets the eye!

I did tests on the mouse-level about how a mouse was attracted to own or adopted pup, but did not put them between two equally distant pups. I do not think that an animal could be equally drawn to two persons and hesitate between these (I have to test my cat) in the sense Lewin thought of the problem:

Dialectic in the psychology of motivation. Seward, G. H.. Psychological Review 46.1 (Jan 1939): 46-61.

I cite:

In agreement with Freud, Lewin would seek the bases of

motivation in personality structure. However, instead of

deriving his force concepts from biological urges  (WHAT WOULD BE THE CASE IN AN ANIMAL) within the person, Lewin derives them from vectors resulting from the

interaction between the person and his field. The soul searchings

of Freud and the class concepts resorted to by

both Freud and McDougall are abandoned in favor of be

havior descriptions in immediate situations. Lewin, like

Tolman (WHO STUDIED RATS) arrives at a kind of operational behaviorism. The

static environment of Watson, however, is replaced by a

dynamic field of forces and the mechanical robot by an

intricately structured organism.

Since Tolman's 'field' is capable of analysis in the familiar stimulus response

terminology, it may be more readily adapted to

laboratory techniques. Tolman is very explicit concerning

the necessity for working out the effect of separate intervening

variables on resultant behavior (31). Lewin's concepts, on

the other hand, may prove of greater usefulness in life situations:

e.g., nursery school and clinic. In the hands of his pupil, Brown (4), they have already been applied to broader social phenomena. "

Dear all,

Merry Christmas to you and a happy new year.