The discipline of psychology is one of the most vital for the relationships between human beings wherever they are situated. The analysis of what a predicted action or way of thinking should follow is a great thing for every individual due to the significance of a man’s psyche. Some deeds of people which are the same in their repeating character are constantly irritating others due to the point of annoyance. The explanation of different events and things has several points, with regards to psychology, which can be admitted as components of social, behavioral and physiological nature (Brody & Hayes, 1995).
The artificiality in psychology deals with many factors which are caused by the activities of a man. This aspect of social sciences has invaded the field of science during the last years of scientific development. Here ethical approach is rather discussed within the artificiality. Scholars try to maintain and implement different models of estimation of this or that phenomenon by means of social psychology and its approaches towards the social problems. In this case “artificiality is necessary if ever one is to clear up what causes what, because the only way to get rid of confounds (extraneous factors that might complicate interpretation) is to strip phenomena down to their bare essentials.” (Abelson, xii, 2004) The explanation of psychological relations with other disciplines deals with the philosophical background of its roots. In this paper the artificial nature of artificiality falls into the relations into social, organizational, and abnormal branches of psychology.
The imitation of natural things throughout synthesized ones is a standpoint on which the notion of artificiality keeps strengths in psychology. Dealing with the societal affairs human beings create some correlations in their minds to facilitate the essence of this or that situation. The communities in the era of high technologies tend to create a sort of artificial reality and existence due to many technological amenities. This is abnormal effect which causes such-like patterns to be avoided in the peoples’ characters. When communicating at the workplace people do not consider the real state of things and circumstances under which they are working. Thus, the researchers strived further in order to maintain the boundaries of a scientific research known as a “breakthrough model”.
The breakthrough model type of scientific research and the principle of connectivity are the co0ncepts which need observation in this part of the paper. First, it is important to point out the notion of these two extents throughout their interpretation in terms of psychological approach. With regards to one of the most eminent researchers in this field of discussion, Keith Stanovich, the principle of connectivity is a notion which outlines the need of new theory to explain new data in complex with current old ones (RUF, 2009). In this approach there is a connection of new theories between each other. On the other hand, the breakthrough model leads its roots towards the Einstein’s theory of relativity and also known as the Einstein syndrome. This model urges to change current accepted and used knowledge due to phenomenal and extra-ordinary theory which puts several corrections in the scientific thought of a defined time. Keith Stanovich and other researchers connect all the progressive achievements due to their interaction in the historical cut, like a building of a house with small bricks. One of the researches comments as for the breakthrough model the following assumption:
In reality the majority of scientific progress is actually made in a series of small connected steps that involve many experiments, not just one single experiment. Also, new scientific theory, in order to be accepted as an advancement, must account for all previously established facts as well as new ones (Bryner, 2009).
Both considered approaches are implemented into theoretical frameworks and serve for gaining precious for humanity achievements which are aimed to make life easier by means of several technological amenities and wider scientific view on this or that phenomenon. In both cases Einstein’s theory of relativity utilizes their notions. Still there are some differences which cannot be ignored and make these concepts individual. Nicole R. Bryner (2009) accompanied with other researchers admits that the breakthrough model contrasts the principle of connectivity because of: 1) explaining the previous data by making the theory unfalsifiable and as a result useless; 2) irrelevance and dismissing of previous data outlining an extra significance and radicalism of a new theory (Bryner, 2009). Nevertheless these two extents are vital for gaining positive outcomes, especially when the scientific-technological progress develops higher and higher from day to day.
Another two concepts are also vital for obtaining outcomes and explaining events due to their connectivity in thematic field and difference in a quantitative reading. The discussion is about the single-cause explanation and the principle of multiple causation. Applied sciences and psychology, in particular, touch upon the cases of single and multiple varieties inside the relations of peoples’ attitudes. Walter L. Wallace in the book Principles of scientific sociology gives an extract which intends to make out the notion of, first, multiple causation principle contrasting other principles:
Not only do the principles of equifinality and equioriginality play essential roles in applied science (especially in its planning phase), but so does the different but related principle of multiple causation – that is, the principle that every effect may have multiple contributory (nonalternative) causes and every cause may have multiple coexistent (nonalternative) effects (Wallace, 1983, p. 434).
The single-cause explanation urges to reach the facts of costs and benefits and positive results within a situational diversity. This urge is ultimate in its extent because of the one-way direction. Taking into account only positive outcomes and explaining events only from the positive side is not actually appropriate for science. It needs the survey of the whole picture according to this or that event. Search for a single-cause and a single-remedy theory is though may lead to a fallacy such-like illusionary correlations. Thus, both principles have in common the sane reciprocal relations between effect and causes, but observe such phenomena according to quantitative change.
To sum up, the psychological science has many critical aspects and deals with different approaches toward the attitudes of individuals taking into account social, organizational, and abnormal psychology. These glimpses were supported by further contrast and comparison of models and principles which present the core paragraphs of this paper, namely: breakthrough model, the principle of connectivity; single-cause explanation and the principle of multiple causation. These parameters helped to better estimate the picture of logical background responding to several attitudes of an individual. The problem of the paper still leaves many detailed aspects as of critical evaluation of its points.
References
- Brody, Roz & Hayes, Nicky. (1995). Teaching introductory psychology. Psychology Press
- Bryner, Nicole R. (2009). Chapter 8: Avoiding the Einstein Syndrome-The Importance of Converging Evidence.
- Rice Unix Facility (RUF). (2009). Web.
- Wallace, Walter L. (1983) Principles of scientific sociology. Aldine Transaction