Gestalt Psychology

Ashish Kafle
Gestalt
• At approximately the same time the behaviorist revolution was
gathering strength in the United States, the Gestalt revolution was
taking hold of German psychology.

• Gestalt psychology was yet another protest against Wundtian

psychology

(This further shows the importance of Wundt’s ideas as an inspiration

for new viewpoints and a basis for launching new systems of
psychology)
 Gestalt contd…
• While the focus of behaviorist’s attack on structuralism and functionalism
was the study of consciousness and the associated method of
introspection, the Gestalt Psychology focused its attack on Wundt’s
elementism (i.e., studying consciousness by dividing it into its elements)

• While the Gestalt psychologists, like the structuralists did, also believed
that introspection was an important method, they denied studying
consciousness by dividing it into elements.

• They believed that we experience things as a whole and not in parts,

therefore reducing the conscious experience into parts would distort the
true meaning of that experience.
 Gestalt contd…
• The term ‘Gestalt’ itself is the German word for ‘whole’, (or ‘form’, or
‘configuration’).

• So, the approach of the Gestalts can be summed up in one sentence:

“The whole is different from the sum of it’s parts”.
Molar (vs) Molecular approach to
psychology
• Gestalt psychology represents the ‘molar approach’ to psychology.

• Molar approach in study of consciousness means studying the

consciousness as whole, as it naturally appears, without any further
analysis.

• Similarly, Molar approach in study of behavior means studying the

goal-directed (purposive) behavior (We saw this was done by Tolman).
• On the other hand, the molecular approach refers to studying
consciousness (or behavior) by breaking it down into its basic
elements.
• Psychologists like Wundt (as experimentalist), Titchener, Pavlov and
Watson used the molecular approach.

• Those taking a molar approach are called holistics and those taking a
molecular approach are called atomists or elementists.
• The holistics study phenomenon as a whole, while the elementists
study complex phenomenon by breaking it into simpler parts.
 Antecedent influence to Gestalt
Psychology: Immanuel Kant
• Immanuel Kant believed that conscious experience is the result of the
interaction between sensory stimulation and the actions of the faculties of
the mind.

• Gestalts called the ‘faculties of the mind’ as ‘characteristics of the brain’.

• Both Gestalts and Immanuel Kant believed that conscious experience can not
be reduced to sensory stimulation, and that the conscious experience is
different from the elements that compose it.
Therefore it is not necessary to look for a one-to-one correspondence between
sensory events and conscious experience.
Immanuel Kant contd…
• For both Kant and the Gestaltists, an important difference exists
between sensation and perception.

• During perception, our mind (Kant) or our brain (Gestalts) change the
sensory experience, that is, it makes the sensation more structured
and organized and thus more meaningful.

• As this adding of meaning to sensory experience results from the

nature of mind (Kant) or the brain (Gestalt), it is independent of
experience.
 Ernst Mach
• Ernst Mach noted that a wide variety of sensory elements can give rise to the
same perception.

• Therefore, Mach believed (like Kant and the Gestaltists) that at least some
perceptions are independent of any particular cluster of sensory elements that
compose them.
These perceptions include: “space form perception” and “time perception”
For eg: The experience of ‘circleness’ is an example of space form perception. We
recognize the form of circle no matter whether a circle is large, small, red, dull, etc.
For eg: ‘Melody’ is an example of ‘time form perception’, where we recognize the
melody as the same no matter what key or tempo it is played in.
Christian von Ehrenfels
• Max Wertheimer, the founder of Gestalt psychology, took several
courses from Ehrenfels between 1898 and 1901 and thus was no
doubt influenced by him.

• Ehrenfels elaborated Mach’s notion of space and time form

perception.

• He said that our perceptions contain ‘form qualities’ that are not
contained in isolated sensations.
Ehrenfels contd…
• For example: No matter what pattern dots are arranged in, we
recognize the pattern and not the individual dots.

• For example: We experience a melody only when several notes are

played together. If we pay attention to individual notes separately, we
do not hear the melody.

• For both Mach and Ehrenfels, ‘form’ is something that emerges from
the elements of sensation.

• This idea is similar to ‘mental chemistry’ of John Stuart Mill.

Ehrenfels contd…
• Like Mill, they believed that elements of sensation often combine to
give rise the experience of form, but also considered the elements
necessary in determining the perception of the whole.

• However, the Gestaltists turned this relationship around by saying

that the whole dominates the parts (not the other way around), and
that the whole is more important.
 William James
• William James considered Wundt’s search for the elements of
consciousness as an artificial and distorted view of mental life.
• Instead of viewing mind as consisting of isolated mental elements,
James proposed ‘Stream of consciousness’.
• James believed that this stream should be the object of psychological
study and any attempt to break it up for more detailed analysis should
be avoided.
• The Gestaltists agreed with Jame’s anti-elementistic stand but
thought that he had gone too far.
William James
• According to Gestaltists, the mind could indeed be divided for study,
but the object of the study should not be the mental elements.
• For the Gestaltists, the correct choice was the study of mental
phenomenon as a whole, and not the individual mental elements.
 Major Contributors of Gestalt
Psychology
• Max Wertheimer
• Kurt Lewin
• Wolfgang Kohler
• Kurt Koffka
Max Wertheimer: The ‘phi’
phenomenon
• Gestalt psychology grew out of a research study conducted in 1910 by
Max Wertheimer using the tachistoscope (it can flash lights on and off
for predetermined fraction of a second).
• Using the tachistoscope, Wertheimer
projected light through two slits.
• If light was shown first through one slit
and then the other with a relatively long
time interval (about 200 milliseconds),
the participants saw two successive lights.
Wertheimer: Phi phenomenon
• However, when the time interval between showing the two lights was
shorter (about 30 milliseconds), the subjects described seeing two
lights that were continuously ‘on’.

• However, with an optimal level of time interval between the two

lights (about 60 milliseconds), the subjects described seeing a single
line of light that appeared to move from one slit to another.

This means that the participants saw a ‘moving’ light when there was
no such movement.
Wertheimer: Phi phenomenon
• Wertheimer called the ‘apparent movement’ of light as the ‘phi
phenomenon’.

• According to Wertheimer, phi phenomenon did not need explaining.

It existed as it was perceived (It existed because it was perceived = No
perception, no existence, thus no need to study).
Therefore, it couldn’t be reduced to anything simpler elements (i.e.,
perception can’t be broken down into simpler elements that combine
to form it)
• The whole experience (i.e, the apparent movement of the light from
one slit to another) differed from the sum of its parts (i.e., the two
stationary slits).
• If we were to describe about phi phenomenon using Wundt’s
approach, then we would say that if we introspected about the
stimulus (i.e., the two flashing lights), we would be able to identify
two successive flashing lights.
• However, no matter how much we introspect, we would still
experience a single line of light moving from one slit to another.

• This thus challenged the associationist, the elementistic psychology.

• Wertheimer published the results of his research in 1912 as
“Experimental studies of the perception of movement”.
• This article is considered to mark the formal beginning of the Gestalt
Psychology school of thought.
Wertheimer: Isomorphism
• After establishing phi phenomenon, Wertheimer used the concept of
‘isomorphism’ to answer how only two stimuli could cause the
perception of motion. (i.e., he explained the phi phenomenon using
law of isomorphism).

• Isomorphism comes from Greek word ‘iso’ (similar) and ‘morphic’

(shape).

• Thus, the meaning of isomorphic is = being of identical or similar

form, shape, or structure.
Wertheimer: Isomorphism contd…
• Gestaltist’s used the concept of isomorphism to say that: “The pattern of
brain activity and the pattern of conscious experience are similar in
structure”.
• According to Gestaltists, the sensory data that we receive from our sense
organs are acted on and transformed by the brain activity.
• And this transformed sensory data is what we experience as ‘conscious
experience’.

• Therefore, our conscious experience is caused by and hence structurally

similar to our brain activity (which transformed the sensory data to result
in conscious experience) = This is called psychophysical isomorphism.
• It was believed that, although the patterns of perceptual and brain
activity might have some similarity, the two represent two totally
different domains and certainly cannot be identical.

• The relationship is like that between a map of the Nepal and the
actual Nepal; although the two are related in important ways, they
are hardly identical.

• The map is identical (iso) in shape (morph) to what it represents, but

it is not a literal copy.
Isomorphism and challenge to
constancy hypothesis
• With their notion of isomorphism, the Gestaltists opposed the
constancy hypothesis, according to which there is a one-to-one
correspondence between environmental stimuli and sensation.
• The constancy hypothesis contended that individual physical events
cause individual sensations and that these sensations remain isolated
unless acted on by one or more of the laws of association or, in
Wundt’s case, are intentionally rearranged.
• This hypothesis was accepted by most British and French empiricists
and was a cornerstone of Titchener’s structuralism.
• The structuralists, following in the tradition of empiricism, viewed
mental events as the passive reflections of specific environmental
events.
• The Gestaltists totally disagreed with the conception of brain
functioning implied by the constancy hypothesis.
• By rejecting the constancy hypothesis, the Gestaltists rejected the
empirical philosophy on which the schools of structuralism,
functionalism, and behaviorism were based.
• Instead, the Gestaltists employed field theory in their analysis of brain
functioning.
• Instead of viewing the brain as a passive receiver and recorder of
sensory information, the Gestaltists viewed the brain as a dynamic
configuration of forces that transforms sensory information.
• They believed that incoming sensory data interacts with force fields
within the brain to cause fields of mental activity; and like the
underlying physical fields in the brain, these mental fields are
organized configurations.

• The nature of the mental configurations depends on the totality of

the incoming stimulation and the nature of the force fields within the
brain, and any configurations that occur in the fields of brain activity
would be experienced as perceptions (psychophysical isomorphism).
• Top–Down Analysis.
According to the Gestaltists, organized brain activity dominates our
perceptions, not the stimuli that enter into that activity.
For this reason, the whole is more important than the parts.
The Gestaltists said that their analysis proceeded from the top to the
bottom instead of from the bottom to the top, as had been the
empirical tradition.
In other words, they proceeded from the wholes to the parts instead of
from the parts to the wholes
Law of Pragnanz
• The Gestaltists believed that the same physical forces that create
configurations such as soap bubbles and magnetic fields also create
configurations in the brain.

• The configurations of energy occurring in all physical systems always

result from the total field of interacting forces, and these physical
forces always distribute themselves in the most simple, symmetrical
way possible under the circumstances.

• This idea itself is called the Law of Pragnanz.

• The law of Prägnanz asserts that all cognitive experiences will tend to be
as organized, symmetrical, simple, and regular as they can be, given the
pattern of brain activity at any given moment.

• Therefore, law of Prägnanz states that psychological organization will

always be as good as conditions allow under the prevailing
circumstances.
• Sensory information may be fragmented and incomplete, but when that
information interacts with the force fields in the brain, the resultant
cognitive experience becomes complete and precise, organized—it
becomes full of meaning
Wertheimer: Productive Thinking
and Learning
• What is productive thinking?
• The conclusions about what productive thinking was, was reached by
Wertheimer through his personal experiences, experimentation, and
interviews with individuals considered excellent problem solvers (such
as Einstein).
• According to Wertheimer, productive thinking is attained when we
cognitively arrange the components of a problem and try to find out
the pattern and principle underlying the problem.
(i.e., when we understand the nature of the problem)
• According to Wertheimer, productive thinking doesn’t occur either through rote
memorization or use of logics.
• He found repetition to be rarely productive and cited as evidence a student’s inability
to solve a variation of a problem when the solution had been learned by rote rather
than grasped by insight.
• Because learning governed by Gestalt principles is based on an understanding of the
structure of the problem, it is easily remembered and generalized to other relevant
situations.
• Thus, this type of learning is more preferred than rote memorization.
• This doesn’t mean that rote memorization and use of logic are to be completely
avoided, as facts such as names and dates should be learned by rote, through
association strengthened by repetition.

• Thus he conceded that repetition was useful for some purposes, but he maintained
that repetition could lead to mechanical performance rather than to understanding or
to creative or productive thinking.
• Similarly, although we suppose that logic guarantees that one will
reach correct conclusions, teaching based on such a notion assumes
that there is a correct way to think and that everyone should think
that way.
• Therefore, like rote memorization, applying logics obstructs
productive thinking because they do not consider that a specific
problem solving involves the total person and the process is unique to
that person.
• What does it mean when Wertheimer says that: “problem solving
involves the total person and the process is unique to that person”?
• According to Wertheimer, reaching an understanding involves many
aspects of learners, such as their emotions, attitudes, and
perceptions, as well as their intellects.
• In gaining insight into the solution to a problem, a student need not—
in fact, should not—be logical.
• Rather, the student should cognitively arrange and rearrange the
components of the problem until a solution based on understanding
is reached.
• Exactly how this process is done will vary from student to student
• Michael Wertheimer (1980), son of Max Wertheimer who published Max’s book on
productive thinking describes an experiment originally performed by Katona in 1940
as a support for Max Wertheimer’s view on productive thinking and learning, that:
“productive thinking is attained when we cognitively arrange the components of a
problem and try to find out the pattern and principle underlying the problem”.

• Katona showed subjects the following 15 digits and told them to study them for 15
seconds: 149162536496481
• With only these instructions, most people attempt to memorize as many digits as
possible in the allotted time.
• Indeed, Katona found that most subjects could reproduce only a few of the
numbers correctly; and when tested a week later, most subjects remembered none.
• Katona asked another group of subjects to look for a pattern or theme
running through the numbers.
• Some individuals in this group realized that the 15 digits represented
the squares of the digits from 1 to 9.
• These subjects saw a principle that they could apply to the problem
and were able to reproduce all numbers correctly, not only during the
experiment but also for weeks after.
• In fact, those individuals could no doubt reproduce the series
correctly for the rest of their lives.
• Another point Wertheimer made about learning was that learning was
governed by intrinsic reinforcement. (Rote memorization was said to be
governed by external reinforcement and the laws of association).
• The existence of a problem creates a cognitive disequilibrium that lasts
until the problem is solved. The solution restores a cognitive harmony, and
this restoration is all the reinforcement the learner needs.
• Because learning and problem solving are personally satisfying, they are
governed by intrinsic (internal) reinforcement rather than extrinsic
(external) reinforcement.
• Wertheimer thought that we are motivated to learn and to solve problems
because it is personally satisfying to do so, not because someone or
something else reinforces us for doing so.
 Kurt Koffka
• After the war, perceiving that American psychologists were becoming
aware of developments in Gestalt psychology in Germany, Koffka wrote an
article for the American journal Psychological Bulletin titled “Perception: An
Introduction to the Gestalt-Theorie” (Koffka, 1922).
He presented the basic concepts of Gestalt psychology along with the results
and implications of considerable research.
• Although the article was important as the first comprehensive explanation
of the Gestalt movement for psychologists in the United States, it may have
done more harm than good.
• The word perception in the title created the lingering misunderstanding
that Gestalt psychologists dealt exclusively with perception and that the
movement had no relevance for other areas of psychology
• In reality, Gestalt psychology was more broadly concerned with cognitive
processes, with problems of thinking, learning, and other aspects of
conscious experience.
• The reason for their early concentration on perception was that Wundt
had been concentrating on perception, and he was the primary focus of
their attack.
• In 1921 Koffka published an important book on child psychology, later
translated into English as The Growth of the Mind: An Introduction to
Child Psychology (1924).
• In 1935, Koffka published Principles of Gestalt Psychology, which was
intended to be a complete, systematic presentation of Gestalt theory
Koffka: Work on Memory
• Koffka’s work on memory
• Koffka wrote most about ‘memory’.
• He assumed that each physical event we experience gives rise to
specific activity in the brain, which he called memory process.

• When the physical even ends, so does the brain activity.

• However, a remnant (trace or residue) of the memory processes

remain in the brain, which he called ‘memory trace’.
• According to Koffka, the memory system therefore consists of an
interaction of new memory processes with the existing memory
traces.
This interaction in the memory system then results in new memory.

• Furthermore, a trace “exerts an influence on the process in the

direction of making it similar to the process which originally produced
the trace”.

• Another point that Koffka made was that we remember things in

general terms rather than by specific characteristics.
• This is because the memory is governed by the law of pragnanz, because of
which our brain makes memories as simple and symmetrical as possible.
Hence, according to Koffka, we tend to remember the essence of the
experience rather than the experience in details.
• For example: Instead of seeing and remembering such things as cats,
clowns, or elephants, we see and remember “catness,” “clownness,” and
“elephantness.”
• This is because the memory trace of classes of experience records what
those experiences have in common—for example, those things that make a
cat a cat.
• With more experience, the trace becomes more firmly established and
more influential in our perceptions and memories.
• The interaction of traces and trace systems with ongoing brain activity
(memory processes) results in our perceptions and memories being
smoother and better organized than they otherwise would be.
• For example, we remember irregular experiences as regular, incomplete
experiences as complete, and unfamiliar experiences as familiar.
• Therefore, like everything else addressed by Gestalt theory, memory is
governed by the law of Prägnanz.
• That is, we tend to remember the essences of our experiences. The brain
operates in such a way as to make memories as simple and symmetrical as is
possible under the circumstances.
• There is a lot of similarity between Koffka’s ideas and current considerations
of concept formation, categorization, and schema in cognitive psychology.
 Kurt Lewin: Field Theory
• Field theory arose within psychology, and specifically in Gestalt
psychology, as a counterpart to the concept of force fields in physics.

• Gestalt psychologists explained psychological phenomenon by

comparing it (or drawing analogy with) the electrochemical force
fields (which are studied in physics and chemistry).
• To explain psychological phenomenon, Gestaltists stated that the
brain contains structure fields of electrochemical forces.
• These forces exist before we have any sensory stimulation.
• And our conscious experience is the result of the interaction between
the sensory data and the force fields of the brain.
• When we get a sensory data, our fields of the brain actively
transforms the sensory data.
• This transformation gives the sensory data certain characteristics that
was not present before.
• Also, upon entering the fields of the brain, the sensory data is not only modified
by but also modifies the structure of the field of the brain.

• Therefore, this type of analysis led to the following conclusion:

The electrochemical force fields in the brain (i.e., the whole) exists prior to the
individual sensory data (i.e., the parts). And it is the whole that gives meaning or
identity to the parts.

• In psychology today the term field theory usually refers to the ideas of Kurt
Lewin.
• Lewin’s work is Gestalt in orientation but extends beyond the orthodox Gestalt
position to include human needs, personality, and social influences on behavior.
Lewin: The Life Space (or the
Psychological Field)
• Probably Lewin’s most important theoretical concept was that of life
space.
• A person’s life space consists of all influences (which he called
‘psychological facts’) acting on him or her at a given time.
• These psychological facts, consist of an awareness of internal events
(such as hunger, pain, and fatigue), external events (restaurants,
restrooms, other people, stop signs, and angry dogs), and recollections
of prior experiences (knowing that a particular person is pleasant or
unpleasant, or knowing that one’s mother tends to say yes to certain
requests and no to others).
• The only requirement for something to be a psychological fact is that it
exist in a person’s awareness at the moment.
• A previous experience is a psychological fact only if one recalls it in
the present.
• Lewin summarized his belief concerning psychological facts in his
principle of contemporaneity.
• This principle states that only those facts that are currently present in
the life space can influence a person’s thinking and behavior.
• Unlike Freud and others, Lewin believed that experiences from
infancy or childhood can influence adult behavior only if those
experiences are reflected in a person’s current awareness.
• Not only does a person’s life space reflect real personal, physical, and social
events, but it also reflects imaginary events.
• If a person believes he or she is disliked by someone, that belief, whether it
is true or not, will influence his or her interactions with that person.
• If we believe we are incapable of doing something, we will not attempt to do
it, regardless of what our true capabilities are.
• Therefore, for Lewin, subjective reality governs behavior, not physical
reality.
One could be physically in a classroom but mentally pondering a forthcoming
social engagement. If so, one would be unaware about what was going on in
the classroom.
• Lewin sought a mathematical model to represent his theoretical
conception of life space.
• Because he was interested in the individual person (the single case)
rather than groups or average performance, statistical analysis was
not useful for his purpose.
• Therefore, he chose topology, a form of geometry, to diagram the life
space.
• This diagram shows a person’s possible goals and the paths leading to
them at any moment of time.
• Within his topological maps, Lewin used arrows (vectors) to represent
the direction of a person’s movement toward a goal.
• He added the notion of giving positive or negative values to the
objects within the life space.
• Objects that are attractive or that satisfy human needs have a positive
valence; objects that are threatening have a negative valence.
• His diagrams were sometimes referred to as a “blackboard
psychology.”
• In conclusion, the life space encompasses all past, present, and future
events that may affect us.
• From a psychological standpoint, each of these events determines
behavior in a given situation.
• Thus, the life space consists of the person’s needs in interaction with the
psychological environment, and this in turn influences our behavior.
• To explain this, Lewin (1936) used the formula B=f(P,E)
i.e., Behaviour (B) = a function (f) of the Person (P) and the Environment (E).
(Source: Online Article on Lewin’s life space concept:
[Link]
• This formulation indicates that a person’s behaviour can only be explained
by considering a combination of both the person and the environment.
• Here the environment (E) is not the physical environment but the
psychological environment – the environment as it is perceived by the
person. (The life space)
• Further, the person and the environment are interdependent (i.e., both
influence each other).
• This creates a complex, dynamic field of interaction, and it is only by
taking this into account that behaviour can truly be understood.
• Therefore, for Lewin, the study of the individual must also take account of
their perception of the wider physical, social, political and economic world
within which that person dwells.
Lewin: Motivation and the Zeigarnik
effect
• Like other Gestaltists, Lewin believed that people seek a cognitive balance.
• Lewin proposed that people seek a basic state of balance or equilibrium
between the person and the environment in the life space.
• According to Lewin, both biological and psychological needs cause tension
in the life space, and the only way to reduce the tension is through
satisfaction of the need.
• Thus, individuals take some action in an effort to relieve the tension and
restore the balance, and this action state is called motivation.
• Thus, to explain human motivation, Lewin believed that behavior involves a
cycle of tension-states or need-states followed by activity and relief.
(Psychological needs, which Lewin called quasi needs, include such intentions as wanting a car,
wanting to go to a concert, or wanting to go to medical school)
• Doing her doctoral work under Lewin’s supervision, Bluma Zeigarnik (1927) tested
Lewin’s tension-system hypothesis concerning motivation.
• According to this hypothesis, needs cause tensions that persist until the needs are
satisfied.
• In her formal testing of Lewin’s hypothesis, Zeigarnik (1927) assumed that giving a
subject a task to perform would create a tension system and that completion of the
task would relieve the tension.
• Regarding this experiment, Lewin made the following predictions:
1. A tension-system develops when subjects are given a task to perform.
2. When the task is completed, the tension is dissipated.
3. If the task is not completed, the persistence of tension results in a greater likelihood
that the subjects will recall the task.
• In all, Zeigarnik gave 22 tasks to 138 subjects. The subjects were allowed
to finish some tasks but not others.
• Zeigarnik’s results confirmed the predictions. The subjects remembered
the uncompleted tasks more readily than they recalled the completed
tasks.
• Her explanation was that for the uncompleted tasks the associated
tension is never reduced; therefore, these tasks remain as intentions,
and as such they remain part of the person’s life space.
• This effect has since become known as the Zeigarnik effect = The
tendency to recall uncompleted tasks more easily than completed tasks.
Lewin’s inspiration for this research on motivation came from
observing a waiter in a café across the street from the
Psychological Institute in Berlin. One evening, while meeting at
the café with some of his graduate students, … someone
expressed amazement at the café waiter’s apparent ability to
remember what everyone had ordered without writing
anything down. Some time after they had paid, Lewin called
the waiter and asked what they had ordered. He replied
indignantly that he no longer knew. (Ash, 1995, p. 271) Once
the waiter’s customers had paid, his task was complete and the
tension had dissipated. He no longer needed to remember
what everyone had ordered.
Lewin: Conflict
• Although the fact that human tendencies often conflict was discussed
by the likes of Plato, St. Paul, Spinoza, and Hegel, and was made the
cornerstone of psychoanalysis by Freud, it was Lewin who first
investigated such conflict experimentally.
• Lewin concentrated his study on three types of conflict:
An approach–approach conflict,
Avoidance-avoidance conflict, and
Approach-avoidance conflict.
• Approach-approach conflict occurs when a person is attracted to two
goals at the same time, such as needing to choose from two movies you
want to see at the same cinema or between two excellent graduate
programs after being accepted by both.
• An avoidance– avoidance conflict occurs when a person is repelled by
two unattractive goals at the same time, such as when one must get a job
or not have enough money, or study for an examination or get a bad grade.
• An approach–avoidance conflict involves only one goal about which one
has mixed feelings (i.e., both positive and negative), such as when having
a steak is an appealing idea but it is the most expensive item on the menu.
This is often the most difficult to resolve
Lewin: Group Dynamics or Social
Psychology
• Lewin’s interest in social psychology began in the 1930s.
• Lewin extended Gestalt principles to the behavior of groups in applied
settings. This work is sometimes called “action research.”
• The outstanding feature of Lewin’s social psychology is thus his concept of
group dynamics = the application of psychological concepts to individual
and group behavior.
• According to Lewin, just as the individual and his or her environment form
a psychological field, so the group and its environment form a social field.
• The nature or configuration of a group (i.e., the social field) will strongly
influence the behavior of its members.
According to Lewin, among the members of each group, there exists a dynamic
interdependence.
• Lewin’s studies of group dynamics led to what are now called encounter
groups and sensitivity training, as well as many different leadership programs.

• One often cited example of Lewin’s action research in group dynamics

involved changing attitudes about food during World War II, when popular
products, such as good meats, were being rationed.
• In the first part of the experiment, housewives heard a dynamic lecture
promoting the nutritional and culinary merits of offal (for example, brains,
liver, kidneys, and heart) or participated in a group discussion of the same
material.
• Following up, results showed that discussion group members (especially
those who made a public verbal commitment to try the new meats) were
vastly more likely to buy and prepare these foods (3% vs 32%)
• In another study, Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) investigated the
influence of various types of leadership on group performance.
• In this study, boys were matched and then placed in one of the 3
groups:
(1) a democratic group, in which the leader encouraged group
discussion and participated with the boys in making decisions;
(2) an authoritarian group, in which the leader made all decisions and
told the boys what to do; or
(3) a laissez-faire group, in which no group decisions were made and
the boys could do whatever they wanted.
• The researchers found that the boys in the democratic group were
highly productive and friendly.
The authoritarian group was highly aggressive, and the laissez-faire
group was unproductive.
• Lewin and his co-researchers concluded that group leadership
influenced the Gestalt characterizing the group and, in turn, the
attitude and productivity of the group’s members.

• In overall, Lewin’s research initiated new areas of social research and

spurred the growth of social psychology.
Wolfgang Kohler: Insight Learning
• Insight learning refers to the learning which involves sudden realization of
the solution of any problem without repeated overt (outwardly visible)
trials and error or continuous practices.
• Insight is the “aha” or “I’ve got it” experience when we suddenly solve a
problem.
• Insight (sudden realization or cognition) occurs when individual suddenly
recognizes relationships between a problem and a solution.
• However, for insight to happen, things necessary for solving the problem
should be available for the individuals.
With the things necessary for solving problem available, the individual
organizes the perceptual stimuli (the things necessary for solution) in
different ways to reach a solution.
• Köhler did much of his work on learning between 1913 and 1917 when he
was on the island of Tenerife during World War I.
• He used apes in his studies.
• In one of his experiments, Köhler suspended a desired object—for example, a
banana—in the air just out of the animal’s reach.
• Then he placed objects such as boxes and sticks, which the animal could use
to obtain the banana, in the animal’s environment.
• The animal could reach the banana by stacking one or more boxes under the
banana or by using a stick, and that’s what the animals did.
• In one case, the animal needed to join two sticks together in order to reach a
banana, and that’s what the animals did.
• Kohler noted that in his studies, the apes reached the solution to the
problem suddenly, that is without much visible trial and error.
• Kohler explained these findings by stating that the apes had gained
‘insight’, and thus were able to solve the problem.
• Köhler noted that during a problem’s presolution period, the animals
appeared to weigh the situation—that is, to test various hypotheses.
This is what Tolman referred to as cognitive, or vicarious, trial and error.
• Then, at some point, the animal achieved insight into the solution and
behaved according to that insight.
• Consistent with the Gestalt view of perception, Köhler interpreted the results of
his animal research in terms of the whole situation and the relationships among
the stimuli.
He considered problem solving to be a matter of restructuring the perceptual field.
Characteristics of insight learning
• Insightful learning is usually regarded as having four characteristics:
(1) the transition from presolution to solution is sudden and complete;
(2) performance based on a solution gained by insight is usually smooth and free of
errors;
(3) a solution to a problem gained by insight is retained for a considerable length of
time;
(4) a principle gained by insight is easily applied to other problems.
• According to the Gestaltists, insightful learning is much more
desirable than learning achieved through either rote memorization or
behavioral trial and error.
• According to the Gestaltists, the reason that Thorndike and others
had found what appeared to be incremental learning was that all
ingredients necessary for the attainment of insight had not been
available to the animal.
• But if a problem is presented to an organism along with those things
necessary for the problem’s solution, insightful learning typically
occurs.
Cognitive Trial and Error Learning
• The Gestaltists emphasized cognitive trial and error as opposed to behavioral
trial and error.

• They believed that organisms come to see solutions to problems.

• In cognitive trial and error, an organism solves the problem ‘perceptually’ by

scanning the environment and cognitively trying one possible solution and
then another until the solution is reached.

• Gestaltists used the law of pragnanz to explain this phenomenon of cognitive

trial and error.
• According to Gestaltists, the ‘problem’ is something that causes disequilibrium
in the brain activity.

• And according to Law of Pragnanz, the brain activity always tends to be in state
of equilibrium.

• Therefore, the problem, which created the disequilibrium, creates a tension

(i.e., need to be back in balance or equilibrium).

• Therefore, the organism is motivated, i.e., cognitively active, until it solves the
problem.
Kohler: Transposition
• Transposition is the Gestalt psychology’s explanation for the ‘transfer
of learning’.
• Kohler studied transposition using chickens as subjects.
• In one experiment, he placed a white sheet and a gray sheet of paper
on the ground and covered both with grain. If a chicken pecked at the
grain on the white sheet, it was shooed away; but if it pecked at the
grain on the gray sheet, it was allowed to eat.
• After many trials, the chickens learned to peck at the grain on only the
gray sheet.
• The question is, What did the animals learn?
• Thorndike, Hull, and Skinner would say that reinforcement
strengthened the response of eating off the gray paper.
• To answer the question, Köhler proceeded with phase two of the
experiment: He replaced the white paper with a sheet of black paper.
• Now the choice was between a gray sheet of paper, the one for which
the chickens had received reinforcement, and a black sheet.
• Given this choice, most reinforcement theorists would have predicted
that the chickens would continue to approach the gray paper.
• However, the vast majority of the chickens approached the black paper.
• Köhler’s explanation for this was that the chickens had not learned a
stimulus-response association (or a specific response) but they had
learned ‘a relationship’.
• In this case, the animals had learned to approach the darker of the two
sheets of paper.
• If, in the second phase of the experiment, Köhler had presented a sheet
of paper of a lighter gray than the one on which the chickens had been
reinforced, the chickens would have continued to approach the sheet
on which they had previously been fed because it would have been the
darker of the two.
• From this conclusion, Kohler explained that transfer of learning
doesn’t occur because the organism has learned to respond in a
specific way in specific situation.
• That is, transfer of learning is not about learning to respond in a
similar manner in similar situations. (This is what Thorndike described
in his identical-element theory of transfer)
• Instead, the transfer of learning is about learning certain ‘principles’
or ‘relationships’ which the organism uses in similar situations.
This is called Transposition.
• The notion of transposition is contrary to Thorndike’s identical-
elements theory of transfer, according to which the similarity
(common elements) between two situations determines the amount
of transfer between them.
Gestalt explanation of Perception:
Perceptual constancy
• Perceptual constancy (not to be confused with the constancy
hypothesis) refers to the way we respond to objects as if they are the
same, even though the actual stimulation our senses receive may vary
greatly.
• The empiricists explained perceptual constancies as the result of
learning.
• The empiricists said that the sensations provided by objects seen at
different angles, positions, and levels of illumination are different, but
through experience we learn to correct for these differences and to
respond to the objects as the same.
• The Gestaltists disagreed with this explanation.
• Köhler, for example, asserted that the constancies are a direct
reflection of ongoing brain activity and not a result of sensation plus
learning.
• The reason we experience an object as the same under varied
conditions is that the relationship between that object and other
objects remains the same, and therefore the mental experience
(perception) is the same.
• Therefore, the Gestaltists’ explanation is simply an extension of the
notion of psychophysical isomorphism.
• In all phenomenon of constancies, there exists a difference between
the character of the sensory stimulation and the character of the
actual resulting perception.

• Therefore, the perception cannot be explained simply as a collection

of elements or the sum of the parts.

The perception is a whole, a Gestalt, is different from the sum of its

parts and any attempt to analyze or reduce it to elements will destroy
it.
• Different types of constancies: Size constancy, brightness constancy,
color constancy, shape constancy.
• The man who approaches us on the street does not seem to grow larger
as he is coming closer. The circle which lies in an oblique plane does not
appear as an ellipse; it seems to remain a circle even though its retinal
image may be a very flat ellipse. The white object with the shadow
across it remains white, the black paper in full light remains black,
although the former may reflect much less light than the latter.
• The physical object as such always remains the same, while the
stimulation of our eyes varies, as the distance, the orientation or the
illumination of that constant object are changed.
Gestalt explanation of Perception :
Perceptual organization
• Wertheimer presented the principles of perceptual organization of
the Gestalt school of psychology in a paper published in 1923.

• He asserted that we perceive objects as unified wholes rather than

clusters of individual sensations.
• These Gestalt principles of perceptual organization are essentially the
rules by which we organize our perceptual world.
• One underlying premise is that perceptual organization occurs
instantly whenever we sense various shapes or patterns.
• The discrete parts of the perceptual field connect, uniting to form
structures distinct from their background.
• The associationist said that we have to learn to perceive patterns or
forms.
• However, Gestaltists believed that perceptual organization is
spontaneous and inevitable whenever we look or listen.
• According to Gestaltists, apart from higher level perception (like
labeling objects by name), simple level of pattern/form/shape
perception doesn’t require learning.

• Two basic principles of perception was provided by Gestaltists:

Principle of Figure-Ground Relationship, and Principle of Grouping.
• Principle of figure-ground relationship:
When we experience a stimulus, the part of the stimulus that attracts us
and becomes center of our attraction is called the ‘figure’ , and the rest
of the part is called the ‘background’.
What becomes figure and what becomes ground can change with the
change in our focus, i.e., which part of the stimulus we pay attention to.
Figure is perceived as distinct and on top of the ground. Figure has
definite shape and location, whereas ground seems to spread all over.
Figure tends to be more meaningful than the ground. Figure is perceived
as nearer to the observer than ground.
• Principle of grouping
Principle of similarity:
Brain tends to group similar elements together, and is perceived as a
pattern.
Similarity = color, size, shape, orientation.
Other stimuli that have different features are generally not perceived as
part of the pattern.
Principle of proximity:
Brain tends to group together objects that are close to one another,
forming a meaningful pattern.
Principle of continuity
There is a tendency in our perception to follow a direction, to connect the
elements in a way that makes them seem continuous or flowing in a
particular direction.
For example, in the following figure, because some dots seem to be tending
in the same direction, one responds to them as a configuration (Gestalt).
Most people would describe this figure as consisting of two curved lines
Principle of closure:
We tend to perceive familiar but incomplete objects as being complete by filling in
the missing gaps, thus completing the pattern to create a whole meaningful object.
Principle of inclusiveness
According to the principle of inclusiveness, when there is more than one figure, we
are most likely to see the figure that contains the greatest number of stimuli.
If, for example, a small figure is embedded in a larger one, we are more likely to see
the larger figure and not the smaller. The use of camouflage is an application of this
principle. For example, ships painted the color of water and tanks painted the color
of the terrain in which they operate blend into the background and are thus less
susceptible to detection
 • Subjective and Objective Reality
• Because the brain acts on sensory information and arranges it into good
configurations, what we are conscious of, and therefore what we act in
accordance with at any given moment, is a product of the brain, not of the
physical world.
• Koffka used this fact to distinguish between the geographical and the behavioral
environments.
• For him, the geographical environment is the physical environment (i.e., objective
reality), whereas the behavioral environment is our subjective interpretation of
the geographical environment (i.e., subjective reality).
• Our own subjective reality governs our actions more than the physical
environment does.
 Contribution of Gestalt Psychology
• The Gestalt movement left an indelible imprint on psychology and influenced
work on perception, learning, thinking, personality, social psychology, and
motivation.
• It continued to foster interest in conscious experience as a legitimate problem
for psychology during the years when behaviorism was dominant.
• A phenomenological approach to psychology, as practiced by Gestalt
psychology, influenced American humanistic psychology movement.
Similarly, Many aspects of contemporary cognitive psychology also owe their
origins to Gestalt psychology.
• Fate of Gestalt Psychology
• Unlike its chief competitor at the time—behaviorism—Gestalt psychology
retained a separate identity. Its major tenets were not fully absorbed into
mainstream psychological thought.
 Criticisms of Gestalt Psychology
• Critics of the Gestalt psychology school of thought charged that the
organization of perceptual processes, as in the phi phenomenon, was
not approached as a scientific problem to be investigated but treated
instead as a phenomenon whose existence was simply accepted.
This was like denying there was a problem at all.
• Further, experimental psychologists asserted that the Gestalt position
was vague and that basic concepts were not defined with sufficient rigor
to be scientifically meaningful.
Gestalt psychologists countered these charges by insisting that in a young
science, attempts at explanation and definition may be incomplete, but
being incomplete was not the same as being vague.
• Other psychologists alleged that Gestalt proponents were too occupied with
theory at the expense of research and empirical data.
Although the Gestalt school assuredly has been theoretically oriented, it also
emphasized experimentation and provided a considerable amount of research.
• However, critics argued that Gestalt experimental work was inferior to
behavioral psychology research because it lacked adequate controls and its
unquantified data were not amenable to statistical analysis.
Gestalt psychologists held that because qualitative results took precedence in
their system, much of their research was deliberately less quantitative than
other schools considered necessary. Much Gestalt research was exploratory,
investigating psychological problems within a different framework.
• Köhler’s notion of insight has also been questioned.
Attempts to replicate the two stick experiment with chimps have
provided little support for the role of insight in learning.
These later studies suggested that problem solving does not occur
suddenly and may depend on prior learning or experience.
• Also, some psychologists considered Gestalt psychologists to be using
poorly defined physiological assumptions.
Gestalt researchers admitted that their theorizing in this area was
tentative, but they believed their speculations were a useful support to
their system.