Some Comments on Eysenck's Treatment of Modern Learning Theory

Eysenck's treatment of the Hullian type of learning theory in his account of the dynamics of anxiety and hysteria is criticized for three reasons. First, he fails to distinguish consistently between habit strength and excitatory potential in their determination of performance. Secondly, he does not allow for some aspects of the role of motivation in learning, and his application of the concept of relevant drive is vague and inconsistent. Thirdly, his interpretation of the performance curves displayed by dysthymic, hysteric, and normal subjects is arbitrary and questionable

Anxiety · Cognitive psychology · Developmental psychology · Habit · Hysteria · Interpretation (philosophy) · Learning theory · Linguistics · Perspective (graphical) · Psychiatry · Psychoanalysis · Psychotherapist · Artificial Intelligence · Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods · Psychology · Social Psychology