scholarly journals Fritz Heider

Psychology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marion Schmidt

Fritz Heider (b. 1896–d. 1988) was an Austrian-American Gestalt and social psychologist. He is considered one of the founding fathers of interpersonal social psychology, contributing in particular his theories of attribution, balance, and motivation. (For attribution theory see the Oxford Bibliographies in Psychology article “Attribution Theory” by Bertram F. Malle and Joanna Korman) Studying in Graz and Berlin, he was influenced both by the Berlin school of Gestalt psychology under Wertheimer, Köhler, and Koffka and the Graz school under Alexius Meinong, as well as by his lifelong friendship with Kurt Lewin. He emigrated to the United States in 1930 to take a joint position at Smith College and the Clarke School for the Deaf in Northampton, Massachusetts. In 1947, he took a position as professor of psychology at the University of Kansas department of psychology, where he remained for the rest of his career. He was married to Gestalt and child psychologist Grace Moore Heider, with whom he also collaborated professionally during their time at the Clarke School. Heider’s approach was not laboratory-based, but philosophical and observational. He was a close observer of how people interact with each other and their surroundings, and also analyzed stories, aphorisms, fables, and fairy tales for generalizable narratives of human behavior. Heider believed that individuals use a kind of naïve or common-sense psychology to explain the behavior of others; this common-sense psychology thus shapes their perception of and interaction with their social world. For decades, he collected and systematized his observations in his notebooks, which were later published. While he was a meticulous and nuanced observer, he was not a prolific writer. Open to different influences, he long grappled with how to systematize human behavior into a generalizable theoretical system of social interaction. Influenced by Kurt Lewin, he sometimes tried to capture interpersonal behavior in a kind of mathematical shorthand, though he never lost sight of the essentially human dimension of his material. Apart from his autobiography, he only published four monographs: in 1927, his revised thesis, Ding und Medium; in 1940 and 1941, together with his wife, two monographs on the psychology of deafness; and in 1958 The psychology of interpersonal relations, which is considered his main work and a seminal contribution to social psychology. Beyond these works, Heider published about a dozen articles on various aspects of phenomenology, Gestalt and social psychology, and the history of psychology. He had few graduate students but nevertheless influenced younger generations through his seminars and his traveling and teaching abroad.

2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-150 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Reisenzein ◽  
Irina Mchitarjan

According to Heider, some of his ideas about common-sense psychology presented in The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations ( Heider, 1958 ) originally came from his academic teacher, Alexius Meinong. However, Heider makes no reference to Meinong in his book. To clarify Meinong’s influence on Heider, we compare Heider’s explication of common-sense psychology with Meinong’s writings, in particular those on ethics. Our results confirm that Heider’s common-sense psychology is informed by Meinong’s psychological analyses in several respects: Heider adopts aspects of Meinong’s theory of emotion, his theory of value, and his theory of responsibility attribution. In addition, Heider more or less continues Meinong’s method of psychological inquiry. Thus, even without Meinong’s name attached, many aspects of Meinong’s psychology found their way into today’s social psychology via Heider. Unknowingly, some of us have been Meinongians all along.


2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 125-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rainer Reisenzein ◽  
Udo Rudolph

This special issue of Social Psychology commemorates the 50th anniversary of Fritz Heider’s 1958 book The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. The contributions to the special issue address the history and current state of attribution research, or illustrate contemporary research in the field. The historical articles document that Heider’s analysis of causal attribution and of common-sense psychology was significantly influenced by his academic teachers Alexius Meinong and Ernst Cassirer. We distinguish between the mainstream reception of Heider’s book, which has given rise to an extensive empirical research program, and a minority reception by authors who emphasized aspects of Heider’s thinking not well represented in mainstream psychology. Currently, there are indications of a “back to Heider” movement in social psychology. This new phase of attribution research is inspired by a fresh reading of Heider’s book, and is marked by an interdisciplinary orientation. The articles illustrating current attribution research address both classic and novel topics: the causality implicit in language, the role of causal attribution in hindsight bias, the justification of actions, and the attribution of mistakes in organizational contexts.


2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 84-90
Author(s):  
Maciej Dymkowski

Afterthoughts on biases in history perception Contemporary social psychology describes various deformations of processing social information leading to distortions of knowledge about other people. What is more, a person in everyday life refers to lay convictions and ideas common in his/her cultural environment that distort his/her perceptions. Therefore it is difficult to be surprised that authors of narrations in which participants of history are presented use easily available common-sense psychology, deforming images of both the participants of history and their activities, as well as the sequence of events determined by these activities. Which cognitive biases, how often, and in what intensity they will be presented in historical narrations depend on statements of dominating common-sense psychology. The article outlines some biases made by historian-lay psychologists, such as attributional asymmetry or hindsight effects, whose occurrence in their thinking, as formed in the cultural sphere of the West, influences history perception and conducted historical interpretations.


Author(s):  
Frank de Caro

Folktales (fictional stories, told orally) have been popular generally for various reasons, as have myths (orally told stories about creation and the gods). They offer models for human behavior and in particular give the message that people must use their wits to trick others when necessary. Folktales can be analyzed from this viewpoint, although they can also be interpreted using psychoanalyis and other methods (much of the scholarship on them has been concerned with collecting and “typing” them) to determine what they mean. In the United States, several kinds have been popular, including tall and other humorous, hero, John and Old Marster, animal, and fairy tales. There have been well-known tellers of such stories, though they have not received their due, because they have chosen to be performers of existing tales rather than creators of new ones, although they may have created new ways of narrating.


2015 ◽  
pp. 151-158
Author(s):  
A. Zaostrovtsev

The review considers the first attempt in the history of Russian economic thought to give a detailed analysis of informal institutions (IF). It recognizes that in general it was successful: the reader gets acquainted with the original classification of institutions (including informal ones) and their genesis. According to the reviewer the best achievement of the author is his interdisciplinary approach to the study of problems and, moreover, his bias on the achievements of social psychology because the model of human behavior in the economic mainstream is rather primitive. The book makes evident that namely this model limits the ability of economists to analyze IF. The reviewer also shares the author’s position that in the analysis of the IF genesis the economists should highlight the uncertainty and reject economic determinism. Further discussion of IF is hardly possible without referring to this book.


2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 5-14
Author(s):  
Sabina Magliocco

This essay introduces a special issue of Nova Religio on magic and politics in the United States in the aftermath of the 2016 presidential election. The articles in this issue address a gap in the literature examining intersections of religion, magic, and politics in contemporary North America. They approach political magic as an essentially religious phenomenon, in that it deals with the spirit world and attempts to motivate human behavior through the use of symbols. Covering a range of practices from the far right to the far left, the articles argue against prevailing scholarly treatments of the use of esoteric technologies as a predominantly right-wing phenomenon, showing how they have also been operationalized by the left in recent history. They showcase the creativity of magic as a form of human cultural expression, and demonstrate how magic coexists with rationality in contemporary western settings.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-89
Author(s):  
Hawken Brackett ◽  
E. Douglas McKnight

<?page nr="69"?>Abstract A misalignment exists between the institutional management of individual student behavior and the stated ethical principles undergirding modern higher education practices in the United States, ultimately creating an ethical failure serving no one. We discuss this misalignment from the site of student affairs, due to its charge to represent both university and student. A technocratic ethical discourse creates the illusion of decision-making autonomy that promises certain outcomes if “common sense” leadership practices are employed. The lens of technical rationality homogenizes and reduces perceived problems to simple either/ors that fail to address the inequitable effects of such ethical logic. We counter “common sense” leadership with a notion of ethical leadership called phronetic leadership, which is informed by an Aristotelian understanding of phronesis (practical wisdom), virtue ethics, and a Foucauldian awareness of governmentality. We argue that phronetic leaders can mend the cleft crippling institutional ethical foundations and practices.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document