The Cinderella of Psychology

The Neglect of Motor Control in the Science of Mental Life and Behavior

Bibliographic Data

ID5770000
AuthorsDavid A Rosenbaum (0000-0003-0103-7676), David Α Rosenbaum (0000-0002-9463-7154, Pennsylvania State University, corresponding author)
Year2005
Volume60
Issue4
Pages308-317
Publication date2005-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Psychologist (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0003-066X • E-ISSN: 1935-990X
PublisherAmerican Psychological Association (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1037/0003-066x.60.4.308
PMID15943523
OpenAlexW1970783852
LanguageEN
Citations received23
References cited54

One would expect psychology--the science of mental life and behavior--to place great emphasis on the means by which mental life is behaviorally expressed. Surprisingly, however, the study of how decisions are enacted--the focus of motor control research--has received little attention in psychology. This article documents the neglect and considers possible reasons for it. The hypotheses considered include three that are raised and then rejected: (a) no famous psychologists have studied motor control, (b) cognitive psychologists are mainly interested in uniquely human functions, and (c) motor control is simply too hard to study. Three other hypotheses are more viable: (d) cognitive psychologists have been more interested in epistemology than in action, (e) psychologists have disfavored motor control because overt responses were the only admissible measure in behaviorism, and (f) psychologists have felt that neuroscientists have the market cornered when it comes to motor control research. There are signs that motor control's Cinderella status is changing

Behaviorism · Experimental psychology · Motor Control · Psychological research · Action Observation and Synchronization · Embodied and Extended Cognition · Social Representations and Identity

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub