Types of Psychology Perspectives

Biological Perspective
In article published by Saul McLeod entitled Biological Psychology, published on
simplepsychology.org in 2007, he stated that the biological perspective of psychology or the
biological approach, believes us to be as a consequence of our genetics and physiology and is the
only approach in psychology that examines thoughts, feelings, and behaviours from a biological
and thus physical point of view.
In continuing he further stated biological perspective is relevant to the study of
psychology in three ways:
1.

Comparative method: different species of animal can be studied and compared. This can

2.

help in the search to understand human behaviour. E.g Pavlov Classical Conditioning &
Physiology: how the nervous system and hormones work, how the brain functions, how
changes in structure and/or function can affect behaviour. For example, we could ask how
prescribed drugs to treat depression affect behaviour through their interaction with the

nervous system
3. . Investigation of inheritance: what an animal inherits from its parents, mechanisms of
inheritance (genetics). For example, we might want to know whether high intelligence is
inherited from one generation to the next.

What is The Comparative Method or Comparative Psychology?

Saul McLeod in his Article entitled Comparative Psychology published on simplepsychology.org

in 2015 stated that the Comparative Method or Comparative psychology is the study of animals
in order to find out about humans. He further stated that, the underlying assumption is that to
some degree the laws of behaviour are the same for all species and that therefore knowledge
gained by studying rats, dogs, cats and other animals can be generalised to humans.
In continuing, McLeod (2015) stated that in psychology the method is often favoured by
those who adopt a nomothetic approach (e.g. behaviourism and the biological approach).
EXAMPLE1
An example to support his view and show comparative psychology was seen in Pavlovs
1887/1902 studies of the classical conditioning of dogs. According to McLeod (2015), Pavlov
(1902) started from the idea that there are some things that a dog does not need to learn. For
example, dogs dont learn to salivate whenever they see food. That is this reflex is hard wired
into the dog. In behaviourist terms, it is an unconditioned response (i.e. a stimulus-response
connection that required no learning). In behaviourist terms, we write:
Unconditioned Stimulus (Food) > Unconditioned Response (Salivate)
In continuing, McLeod (2015) stated that Pavlov showed the existence of the
unconditioned response by presenting a dog with a bowl of food and the measuring its salivary
secretions. However, that any object or event which the dogs learnt to associate with food,
would trigger the same response, he realized that he had made an important scientific discovery.
Pavlov (1902) in his experiment used a bell as his neutral stimulus (It is called neutral because
it produces no response). Whenever he gave food to his dogs, he also rang a bell. After a number
of repeats of this procedure, he tried the bell on its own which caused an increase in salivation. In

conclusion Pavlov (1902) stated, .that for associations to be made, the two stimuli had to be
presented close together in time with reference to McLeod (2015), he called this the Law of
Temporal Contiguity Pavlov also concluded that if the time between the conditioned
stimulus (bell) and unconditioned stimulus (food) is too great, then learning will not occur.
EXAMPLE 2
With reference to Saul McLeod (2015) article published on simplepsychology.org, another
example of Comparative Method or Comparative Perspective is that of the study of child
development. According to McLeod (2015), Konrad Lorenz (1935) Imprinting Theory, studied
imprinting in ducks and geese. Lorenz (1935) found that there was a critical period in infancy
when the duckling would become attached and that if this window of opportunity were missed it
would not become attached in later life.
Lorenz found that Lorenz found that geese follow the first moving object they see, during a 1217 hour critical period after hatching. This process is known as imprinting, and suggests that
attachment is innate and programmed genetically. He further stated that Imprinting occurs
without any feeding taking place, if no attachment has developed within 32 hours its unlikely
any attachment will ever develop. Lorenz Theory of Imprinting was supported by Hess (1958)
whom stated that although the imprinting process could occur as early as one hour after hatching,
the strongest responses occurred between 12 and 17 hours after hatching, and that after 32 hours
the response was unlikely to occur at all.