UNIT 4 Structuralism*

Structure
4.0 Introduction
4.1 Antecedents of Structuralism
4.1.1 Helmholtz and Fechner
4.1.2 Wundt
4.2 The Subject Matter of Titchener’s Structuralism
4.2.1 The Content of Conscious Experience
4.2.2 Introspection
4.2.3 Mechanistic Approach
4.2.4 Elements of Consciousness
4.3 Criticisms
4.3.1 Criticisms of Introspection
4.3.2 Additional Criticisms of Titchener’s System
4.4 Contributions of Structuralism
4.5 Summary
4.6 Key Words
4.7 Review Questions
4.8 References and Further Reading
4.9 References for Figure
4.10 Web Resources
Learning Objectives
After reading this Unit, you will be able to:
●● Explain the subject matter of the school of structuralism;
●● Discuss the contributions of Edward Titchener; and
●● Elucidate the contributions of structuralism as a psychology.

4.0 Introduction
Structuralism, a systematic movement founded in Germany, can be thought
of as a highly developed introspective psychology, which was represented
in its final American form by the work of Edward Bradford Titchener. In
1898, in order to differentiate his perspective from the others, Titchener
came up with the name structural psychology or structuralism.
Box 4.1: Edward Bradford Titchener
Titchener got interested in Wundtian psychology while he was at Oxford.
He had a lot of enthusiasm to study at Leipzig, at that time considered to

* 
Dr. Saif R. Farooqi, Department of Applied Psychology, Vivekananda College,
University of Delhi

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 67 4/1/2021 3:09:09 PM

 Development of
Psychological Thought
be the place for scientific learning. In 1892, Titchener earned his doctoral
degree, under Wundt, at Leipzig. From 1893 to 1900, Titchener was
involved in many scholarly activities, such as establishing his laboratory,
conducting research, and writing articles, eventually publishing more
than 60 articles. In his 35 years at Cornell University, he supervised more
than 50 PhD dissertations.
His notable books are An Outline of Psychology (1890), Primer of
Psychology (1898), and the four-volume Experimental Psychology: A
Manual for Laboratory Practice (1901-1905).
Titchener’s system was the improved version of the psychology of his
Figure 4.1: Edward Bradford mentor, Wilhelm Wundt. He dramatically modified and revised Wundt’s
Titchener (1867-1927) system of psychology when he brought it from Germany to the United States,
Source: www.verywellmind.com despite claiming to be a staunch follower of Wilhelm Wundt. Structuralism
gained huge popularity in the United States that lasted some two decades
until it was replaced by newer movements.
Structuralism had the following aims:
●● To describe the components of consciousness in terms of basic
elements.
●● To describe how these basic elements are combined.
●● To explain the connections of the elements of consciousness to the
nervous system (i.e., physical processes). Titchener suggested that
physiological processes provide a continuous substratum that gives
psychological processes a continuity they otherwise would lack.
Therefore, some characteristics of mental events can be explained
through nervous system, which itself does not cause conscious
experience.
The definition of psychology, according to structuralism is as follows -
“psychology is the analytic study of the generalized adult normal human
mind through introspection.”
Box 4.2:  Wundt-Titchener Controversy
Titchener always called himself to be a follower of Wundt. His structuralism
is a representation of Wundtian Psychology. However, suggestions have
been made that systems of Wundt and Titchener are very different from
each other. It is said that Titchener came up with his own approach, which
he called structuralism. The label “structuralism” is said to best fit to
describe the psychology of Titchener, and has little to do with that of Wundt.

4.1 Antecedents of Structuralism

4.1.1 Helmholtz and Fechner
In 1858, Wundt was appointed as assistant of Hermann von Helmholtz
and the two worked together in the same physiological laboratory for the
next 13 years. Wilhelm Wundt used the methods of Helmholtz and based
his work on the sensory physiology of Helmholtz. Later, Titchener adopted
these methods from Wundt, for his structuralism.
68

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 68 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 In 1860, approximately 15 years before Wundt began working in the field Structuralism
of psychology, Gustav Theodor Fechner published his book Elements of
Psychophysics. Wundt acknowledged and accredited Fechner’s work as
the “first conquest” in experimental psychology. Titchener also referred to
Fechner as the father of experimental psychology. Fechner’s influence was
so strong that Titchener used the experimental method for his structuralism.
4.1.2  Wilhelm Wundt
Even though there is the controversy that Titchener’s system was very
different from that of Wundt, it is completely impossible to talk about
structuralism and not mention Wundt or Wundtian psychology. Wundtian
psychology has its roots in natural science as it is the domain of psychology
that adopts the methodology and analytic goals common to physics,
chemistry, and biology. The approach emphasizes that psychology should
be studied by defining psychological events in terms of variables and then
utilizing analytic scrutiny of the experimental method to interpret these
variables. Psychology within this system makes use of the method of
introspection, in order to analytically study the generalized adult human
mind. This approach was pioneered by Wilhelm Wundt and was later further
promoted in the United States by Titchener. This system is sometimes also
Figure 4.2: Wilhelm Maximilian
referred to as content psychology, as its aim was to study the content of the Wundt (1832 – 1920)
mind. Additionally, Titchener emphasized the mental structures and named
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org
this system structural psychology in his writings in 1898.
Irrespective of the name given to this system, its major goal was to carefully
apply the experimental method of introspection, for the purpose of analysing
the human mind, which was carried out by the trained scientists. By analogy,
this system intended to develop the “chemistry of consciousness.”
Check Your Progress 1
1) What are the aims of structuralism?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
2) In what ways did Helmholtz, Fechner, and Wundt play an influential
role in structuralism?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

4.2 The Subject Matter of Titchener’s

Structuralism
4.2.1 The Content of Conscious Experience
Titchener asserted that conscious experience is the subject matter of
psychology as this conscious experience depends upon the person who
is experiencing it real time. This kind of experience that psychologists
study differs from those studied by scientists in other fields. For instance,
phenomena such as sound or light can be studied by both physicists as well
as psychologists. The difference is that whereas the physicists investigate
69

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 69 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 Development of the phenomena by taking into consideration the physical processes involved,
Psychological Thought psychologists examine these phenomena by considering human beings
observe and experience them. In this way, we can say that other natural
sciences are independent of the individual’s experience.
Titchener explained it further by taking an example from physics. The
temperature in a room may be measured at, let us say, 85° Fahrenheit,
irrespective of whether anyone is present in room to feel or experience it.
However, it is only when the observers are present in this particular room
that they can report of feeling uncomfortably warm. Therefore, this feeling,
or the experience of warmth, is dependent on the individuals experiencing
it, i.e., the people who are present in the room. According to Titchener, this
type of conscious experience was the only appropriate focus for research
in the field of psychology. In his book published in 1909, A Textbook of
Psychology, Titchener differentiated between two kinds of experience-
dependent experience and independent experience.
Titchener also warned against confusing the mental process with the object
of observation while studying conscious experiences, which he named as
stimulus error. For example, observers who see an apple and then describe
that object as an apple, rather than giving an account of what they experience
in terms of the elements of shape, colour and brightness etc. are actually
committing the stimulus error. The object of observation is to be described in
terms of the elements of conscious experience and not in everyday language
Observers are unable to differentiate what they have learned about the
object in the past from their own immediate experience, when they focus
on the stimulus object in place of the conscious content. All that observers
can really know about the object is that its colour, shape and texture. If the
observers describe anything other than the colour, brightness, and spatial
characteristics, they are not really observing the object but interpreting it.
As a result, they would be dealing with mediate experience and not the
immediate experience.
Consciousness was defined by Titchener as the sum or aggregate of our
experiences as they exist at a given period of time. Mind, according to
him, is the sum of our experiences accumulated over an entire lifetime.
Consciousness and mind are almost similar, with only difference being that
whereas consciousness consists of the mental processes occurring at a given
moment, mind consists of the sum total of these processes.
Structural psychology, as envisaged by Titchener, was a pure science and
he was not interested in applying psychological knowledge to it. According
to him, the purpose of psychology was not to reform societies or cure sick
minds, but to discover the facts of the structure of the mind. He was of the
view that scientists should not only contemplate about the practical worth of
their work. It was due to this reason that he did not favour the development of
animal psychology, child psychology, and all other domains of psychology
that was not in line with his introspective experimental psychology of the
content of conscious experience.
4.2.2 Introspection
The form of introspection, or self-observation that Titchener promoted,
depended on observers who were scrupulously trained to describe the
70

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 70 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 elements of their conscious experience instead of just reporting the name Structuralism
of observed or experienced stimulus that they were already familiar with.
Titchener did realize that we all learn to describe our experiences in terms
of the stimulus, for instance, that a red round object is an apple, and that in
everyday life this is beneficial and necessary.
However, this practice had to be unlearned in his psychology laboratory.
Titchener described his method of introspection by using the term systematic
experimental introspection, which was given by Oswald Külpe. Titchener
used subjective, detailed, qualitative reports of his subjects’ mental activities
for the purpose of introspection, in a similar way as used by Külpe. Also,
Titchener opposed Wundt’s approach to introspection, as he believed that
with its focus on objective and qualitative measurements, the approach
was not suitable for unveiling the elementary sensations and images of
consciousness that were fundamental to his psychology.
Titchener differed from Wundt in that, whereas Wundt focused upon the
synthesis of the elements through apperception, Titchener was concerned
with analysis of complex conscious experience into its elements or
component parts. In other words, it can be said that Titchener stressed on
the parts and Wundt stressed upon the whole. Consistent with most of the
British associationists and empiricists, Titchener’s aim was to uncover the
so-called atoms of the mind. Before Titchener even went to Leipzig to study
with Wundt, his approach to introspection had already started developing.
It has been suggested that while Titchener was influenced by the writings
of James Mill while he was still enrolled at Oxford University (Danziger,
1980).
4.2.3 The Mechanistic Approach
The mechanistic spirit of philosophy also inspired Titchener, as can be
seen in his image of the observers who used to bring in the data in his
laboratory. The subjects were often referred to as reagents in the research
reports published by Titchener. In natural sciences, reagent is a term used by
chemists to denote substances that are used to detect, measure or examine
other substances because of their capacity to undergo certain reactions.
A reagent is a passive agent used in chemical reactions so as to elicit or
prompt responses from some other substance. Titchener applied this concept
in his laboratory on his human observers and thought of his subjects to be like
mechanical recording instruments, who objectively reacted and responded
to the stimulus by noting its characteristics. The subjects were thoughts to
be unbiased, detached machines. The trained observations would become
so automatic and mechanized that subjects would no longer feel that they
were carrying out some conscious process, which was also in accordance
with the Wundt’s idea.
It is then easier to suggest that all human beings are machines if we do
consider the observers in the laboratory to be machines. This thinking was
influenced by the Galilean-Newtonian mechanical view of universe, an idea
that continued to exist even after the slow death of structuralism.
71

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 71 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 Development of The image of human-as-machine continued to be the characteristic of
Psychological Thought experimental psychology throughout the first half of the twentieth century,
which can be seen if we study the history of psychology. Titchener asserted to
evaluate the introspective observation through experimental approach in his
psychology. By carefully following the rules of scientific experimentation,
he figured out that an experiment is an observation that can be repeated,
isolated, and varied.
According to Titchener, if an observation is repeated more frequently, it
will be more likely for to see clearly and describe accurately what has been
seen. Moreover, the more stringent in isolating an observation, easier will
be the task of observation, lesser will be the chances of getting distracted
by irrelevant circumstances or of putting emphasis on the irrelevant
point. Finally, if an observation is varied widely, it will be easier for to
determine the generalizability of experience and higher will be the chances
of discovering laws. The subjects or reagents in Titchener’s laboratory
gave lengthy, detailed observations of the elements of their experiences by
introspecting on a wide variety of stimuli.
4.2.4 The Elements of Consciousness
Titchener proposed that psychology had three crucial goals:
●● To reduce conscious processes to their simplest components.
●● To identify laws by which these elements of consciousness were
associated.
●● To connect the elements with their physiological conditions.
Therefore, it is quite evident that the goals of Titchener’s structural
psychology were similar to those of the natural sciences. Once the scientists
decide upon the part of the natural world that they intend to study, they work
ahead to identify or discover its elements, exhibiting how these elements are
compounded to form complex phenomena, and finally, formulating laws
that govern these processes.
A large amount of Titchener’s research focused upon the first goal, i.e.,
identifying the elements of consciousness. According to Titchener, there
were three elementary states of consciousness:
●● Sensations
●● Images
●● Affective states
Sensations are the basic elements of perception and can occur in the smells,
sights, sounds, and other experiences that arise from physical objects present
in the natural world. Images are the elements of ideas that can be found in
the process that reflects past experiences, i.e., the experience that are not
actually present at the moment, for example, the memory of a past event.
Affective states, or affections, are the elements of emotion and are found in
experiences like love, anger hate, happiness, sadness etc.
In his book, An Outline of Psychology (1896), Titchener gave a list of all the
elements of sensation that he had discovered through his extensive research.
The list included approximately 44,500 individual sensation qualities, out
72

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 72 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 of which 11,600 were identified as auditory sensations, whereas the rest Structuralism
32,820 were identified as visual sensations. Titchener believed that each of
these elements was conscious and different from all of the others that would
combine with other elements to give rise to perceptions and ideas.
All these elements, however basic and irreducible, could be categorized, just
as chemical elements are grouped into classes. All these mental elements
have certain qualities and attributes that allow us to differentiate between
different elements, despite their simplicity.
Titchener added clearness and duration to the Wundtian attributes of
intensity and quality. He considered these four attributes to be fundamental
to all sensations as according to him, all of them are present to some extent
in all experiences:
●● Quality is the characteristic, such as “warm” or “red” that explicitly
differentiates each element from every other element,
●● Intensity refers to the strength, weakness, loudness, or brightness of
a sensation,
●● Duration is the course or time till a sensation lasts
●● Clearness is concerned with the significant role that attention plays
in conscious experience; experience towards which our attention is
directed is clearer than experience towards which our attention is not
directed.
While all of these four attributes are present in sensations and images, only
quality, intensity and duration are present in affective states. Clearness, as per
Titchener, was lacking in affective states because he believed that focusing
attention directly on an element of emotion or feeling was impossible. In
an effort to do so, the affective quality of conscious experience, such as
the sadness or the happiness, disappears. Some of the sensory processes,
particularly the ones that involve touch and vision, possess one more
attribute, called extensity, as they also take up space. It is possible to reduce
all conscious processes to one of these attributes.
Check Your Progress 2
1) What do you understand by committing stimulus error?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
2) How is Titchener’s approach considered to be mechanistic?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

4.3 Criticisms
Historically speaking, it has mostly been the case that people gain
prominence in a field when they reject or counter an older viewpoint.
However, Titchener is an exception as he chose to stand firm even when
everyone else was moving beyond him. The formal published statement
of Titchener had remained the same, even when the intellectual climate of
73

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 73 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 Development of thought in European and American psychology had changed, by around the
Psychological Thought second decade of the 20th century. Consequently, numerous psychologists
came to view his structural psychology as a failed attempt to adhere to
obsolete principles and methods.
Titchener assumed that he was laying a foundation for psychology, but his
attempt turned out to be only one of the phases in the history of psychology.
Although the domain of structuralism lost its charm with the death of
Titchener, the fact that it successfully survived for so long points towards
the commanding personality that he was.
4.3.1  Criticisms of Introspection
The criticisms surrounding the method of introspection in structuralism
had more to do with the kind of observation practiced at Titchener’s
and Külpe’s laboratories than with Wundt’s internal perception method.
Whereas Titchener and Külpe dealt with the subjective reports of the basic
elements of consciousness, Wundt was concerned with obtaining objective
and quantitative responses to external stimuli.
Although Titchener modified and refined the method of introspection used
in his psychology, to make it more precise, so as it does conform to the
requirements and tenets of science, the fault-finding continued:
●● First criticism is related to the definition. Although Titchener attempted
to define what he meant by introspective method by relating it to
specific experimental conditions, he apparently failed at it. The course
that an observer follows will vary extensively with the nature of the
consciousness observed, with the objective of the experiment, and/
or with the instructions given by the instructor. Thus, introspection
can be thought of as a generic term that includes a large number of
specific methodical procedures.
●● The second source of criticism in Titchener’s methodology was the
training process of introspection, or precisely, the uncertainty about
what the introspectors were trained to do. Titchener instructed his
graduate student observers to ignore certain classes of words (or the
so-called meaning words) that had become fixed in their vocabulary.
For instance, the sentence, “I see a chair,” does not hold any scientific
meaning for a structuralist; the word “chair” is considered a meaning
word, based on the previously learned and universally agreed upon
knowledge about the specific combination of sensations that we
learned to identify as chair. So, the observation “I see a chair” did
not tell the structural psychologist anything about the elements of
the observers’ conscious experience. The structuralist was concerned
with the specific elementary forms of the experience and not with the
collection of sensations summed up in a meaning word. Observers
who said “chair” were committing what Titchener referred to as the
stimulus error. But how would the trainers describe their experience if
ordinary words were to be removed from the vocabulary? It suggested
that an introspective language would have to be developed. In order
to determine the conscious processes with accuracy and precision,
Titchener (also, Wundt) stressed on controlling the experimental
conditions, such that any two observers would have identical
74

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 74 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 experiences and their results would substantiate one another. It also Structuralism
pointed towards the possibility of developing a working vocabulary
for the observers, which was free of meaning words, as these highly
similar experiences took place under controlled conditions. Ultimately,
it is be due to our shared experiences in routine life that we arrive
at common meanings for familiar words. The idea of developing an
introspective language, however, could only be conceived but never
realized.
●● Again, observers at different laboratories frequently obtained different
results, even when experimental conditions were most rigidly
controlled. Even introspectors at the same laboratory, focusing on the
same stimulus material often failed to obtain similar observations.
Regardless, Titchener firmly believed that identical results would be
obtained and agreement would be reached eventually. Perhaps, the
school of structuralism would have lasted longer than it actually did,
had sufficient uniformity been achieved.
●● Critics also argued that introspection was actually a form of
retrospection, because there was a time gap between when the
experience occurred, and when it was reported (Ebbinghaus had
demonstrated through his experiment that most of the forgetting
takes place immediately after an experience, so it is highly likely
that some of the experience might be lost by the time it was reported
for introspection). Structural psychologists answered the critiques
on two grounds: first, they specified that there was very brief time
interval between experience and reporting of it; and, secondly, they
proposed that there exists a primary mental image, which according
to them preserved the experience for observer until it was reported.
However, it is possible for an experience to get altered as we examine
it through the method of introspection. For instance, it is difficult to
introspect the conscious state of anger. It is because in the process
of being cognizant towards and trying to break the experience
into its constituent elements, our anger may disappear or subside.
However, Titchener still held that with continued practice and efforts,
his introspectors would be able to perform their task of observation
without altering it consciously.
●● Yet another criticism of introspective method arose from the notion
of the unconscious mind, which was proposed by Sigmund Freud in
the early years of the 20th century. If Freud’s claim, that a part of
our mental functioning is unconscious, is to be believed, then it is
also clear that it cannot be explored using introspection. One historian
wrote: At the base of introspective analysis was the assumption that it
is possible to access all of the mind’s functioning through conscious
observation. Introspection could not provide a complete picture of
mental functioning, unless every thought and emotion of human mind
was capable of being observed. If vast areas of our mind remained
curtailed like an iceberg, behind powerful defensive barriers and
consciousness was just like tip of that iceberg, then introspection was
bound to be a failure.
75

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 75 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 Development of 4.3.2 Additional Criticisms of Titchener’s System
Psychological Thought
●● The structuralist movement was accused of being artificial and
sterile, since it attempted to synthesize conscious processes into
elements. Critics argued that it is not possible to capture the whole
of an experience by the summation or combination of its elementary
components. They also argued that experience comes to us as unified
wholes and not as discrete individual sensations, images, or affective
states. We inevitably lose on some of the conscious experience in our
effort to artificially analyse it. It was on this ground or base that a
group of psychologists launched their revolt against structuralism in
order to give rise to a new school of thought, Gestalt Psychology.
●● The structuralist definition of psychology was also criticized. The
structuralists chose to exclude several specialities that were emerging
during the Titchener’s later years, because it did not fit in their idea
of psychology. For instance, Titchener did not even regard child
psychology or animal psychology, as psychology. His conception
of psychology was too narrow to appreciate and embrace the new
work being done and the new directions being explored in the field.
Psychology began to quickly move beyond Titchener.

4.4 Contributions of Structuralism

Despite these criticisms, Structuralism has also been given due credits for
its contribution in the field:
●● Their subject matter, conscious experience, was clearly defined.
●● Their research methods were in the highest traditions of science, as
they were based on observation, experimentation, and measurement.
Self-observation was considered to be the most appropriate method
for studying experience and the subject matter, because consciousness
could only be perceived by the person having the experience.
●● Even though the subject matter and goals of the structuralists are no
longer significant, the method of introspection, which is defined as the
examination of one’s own thoughts and emotions by giving a verbal
report based on experience, continues to be used in many areas of
psychology. For instance, self-reports are requested from the person
who has undergone an unusual experience, such as weightlessness
for people going in space. Even in psycho physics, researchers still
ask their subjects to report whether a second tone sounds softer or
louder than the first. Also, responses on attitude scales and personality
tests or inventories, and clinical reports from patients etc. are all
introspective in nature.
●● Cognitive processes such as reasoning that are based on introspection
are commonly used in psychology today. For example, industrial/
organizational psychologists may obtain introspective reports from
employees about their interaction with computer terminals, which
can later be used to develop user-friendly computer component. Such
verbal reports, which are based on personal experience are reliable
forms for obtaining data.
76

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 76 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 ●● Finally, cognitive psychology also put greater emphasis on Structuralism
introspection as its interest in conscious processes revived. Therefore,
we can say that the introspective method stood the test of time and
remained alive, though not exactly as how Titchener had envisaged.
●● One of the most significant contributions of structuralism was that it
served as a target of criticism. Structuralism turned out to be a strong,
established orthodox school of thought, which could be targeted
and criticized by the newly developing movements in psychology.
These newer approaches owed their existence in great amount to
their progressive reformulation of the structuralist approach. It is by
opposing the existing systems or ideas that advancements in science
occur. In analogy, having Titchener’s structuralism as an idea to
counter, psychology also moved far beyond the delineated boundaries
of his rigid system.
Check Your Progress 3
1) What is the criticism of retrospection against introspection?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………
2) How has the definition of structuralism been criticized?
………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………

4.5 Summary
Now that we have come to the end of this Unit, let us list all the major points
that we have learnt:
●● Edward Titchener was the founder of structuralism, a systematic
school of psychology, after completing his doctorate under Wundt,
claiming to have extended his mentor’s ideas.
●● Helmholtz, Fechner, and Wundt are considered to be antecedents of
structuralism.
●● The aims of structuralism were: to describe the components of
consciousness in terms of basic elements, to describe how these basic
elements are combined, and to explain the connections of the elements
of consciousness to the nervous system (i.e., physical processes).
●● One of the major subject matters of structuralism was studying the
content of consciousness.
●● Titchener used the method of introspection. He described his
method of introspection by using the term systematic experimental
introspection, which was given by Oswald Külpe.
●● Titchener used the mechanistic approach, according to which humans
are viewed as machines. This view was taken from the Galilean-
Newtonian model, which suited Titchener well for conducting his
laboratory experiments.

77

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 77 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 Development of ●● According to Titchener, there are three elementary states of
Psychological Thought consciousness – sensations, images, and affective states.
●● There were many criticisms regarding the method of introspection
used by Titchener. Some of these criticisms were that there was no
specific definition of introspection, there were faults in the training
process involved, and that rather than being introspection, it was
actually retrospection.
●● The structuralist movement was accused of being artificial and sterile,
since it attempted to synthesize conscious processes into elements.
Arguments were made that it is not possible to capture the whole of
an experience by the summation or combination of its elementary
components.
●● A major contribution of structuralism is that the method of introspection
- the examination of one’s own thoughts and emotions by giving a
verbal report based on experience — continues to be used in many
areas of psychology.
●● Structuralism turned out to be a strong, established orthodox school
of thought, which could be targeted and criticized by the newly
developing movements in psychology.

4.6 Key Words

Structuralism: The first school of psychology, a systematic movement
established by Edward Bradford Titchener, who extended the psychology
of Wundt, Structuralism aimed to break down consciousness into smaller
elements, and understand their combination.
Consciousness: The sum or aggregate of our experiences as they exist at a
given period of time.
Introspection: Self-observation involving describing the elements of
conscious experience instead of just reporting the name of observed or
experienced stimulus.
Sensation: Basic elements of perception and can occur in the smells, sights,
sounds, and other experiences that arise from physical objects present in the
natural world.
Images: The elements of ideas that can be found in the process that reflects
past experiences, i.e., the experience that are not actually present at the
moment, for example, the memory of a past event.
Affective States: The elements of emotion and are found in experiences
like love, anger hate, happiness, sadness etc.

4.7 Review Questions

1) ……………, ……………, and …………… are considered to be the
antecedents to structuralism.
2) The three elements of consciousness are …………, ……………, and
…………… .
3) Titchener was inspired by ……………… model, in using the
mechanistic approach.
78

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 78 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM

 4) What is the definition of psychology, according to structuralism? Structuralism

5) What is the difference between mind and consciousness?

6) How is the method of introspection used by Titchener different from
that of Wundt?
7) Describe the different ways in which the elements of consciousness
are described.
8) Discuss the major criticisms against the method of introspection.
9) How did the school of structuralism play a role in the development of
other schools and perspectives in psychology?
10) In what ways are the method of introspection still used in psychology?

4.8 References and Further Reading

Brennan, J. F. (2014). History and Systems of Psychology. Harlow: Pearson
Education Ltd.
Hergenhahn, B. R. & Henley, T. B. (2009). An Introduction to the History
of Psychology. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning.
Marx, M. H. & Hillix, W. A. (1963). Systems and Theories in Psychology.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Schultz D. P. & Schultz, S. E. (2008). A History of Modern Psychology.
Wadsworth: Thomson Learning, Inc.

4.9 References for Figure

Cherry, K. (2020). Edward B. Titchener and Structuralism. https://www.
verywellmind.com/edward-b-titchener-biography-2795526
Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Wundt

4.10  Web Resources

Cherry, K. (2020). Edward B. Titchener and Structuralism. https://www.
verywellmind.com/edward-b-titchener-biography-2795526
Cherry, K. (2020). The Origins of Structuralism in Psychology. https://
www.verywellmind.com/who-founded-structuralism-2795809
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica (2020). Edward B. Titchener:
American Psychologist. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edward-B-
Titchener
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica (2020). Structuralism. https://
www.britannica.com/science/structuralism-psychology
Answers to Review Questions (1-3)
(1) Helmholtz, Fechner, Wundt; (2) Sensations, Images, Affective States;
(3) Galilean-Newtonian model

79

BPCC 106_2nd Proof.indd 79 4/1/2021 3:09:10 PM