transition. The chapter describes the ways in which Edward Chace Tolman played an active part in Brunswik’s transition from Vienna to Berkeley.
In a way, the development of the lens analogy into the lens model brackets this transition period: Still in Vienna, Brunswik designed a geometrical lens analogy (using only straight lines), at the end of the transition stood an icon (showing mostly curved lines). Initially, developed as a graphical representation of Bühler’s duplicity principle, Brunswik subsequently used the lens analogy to communicate his approach to perceptual achievement (alias constancy) to an English- speaking audience. With the development of his program of probabilistic functionalism, vicarious functioning became a predominant principle in Brunswik’s account of organismic achievement. Correspondingly, the lens model was not only informed by the lens analogy but also by other metaphors, such as “hierarchy” and “arch,” which are especially notable in Brunswik’s elaborate Figure 10 at the close of Part I of Perception and the Representative Design of Psychological Experiments. Only later, after its original publication in 1947, did Brunswik refer to this particular figure as “lens-like.” Thus, the lens model was developed by bringing additional metaphors on board; it was developed as a mixed metaphor and has been such ever since.
In an effort to find a suitable photograph of Brunswik, which is customary in this series of Portraits, we contacted various institutions in Austria and also the Gazi Institute in Turkey, where Brunswik had spent 1931-1932 as a visiting lecture. Thanks to a number of Turkish colleagues we were able to obtain the photograph of Brunswik showing him with colleagues and graduate students in Ankara, which is available for your inspection at the Brunswik Society’s website. Brunswik looks rather formal in this picture and in my humble judgement was not yet the person who would design the lens model icon in the 1955 article in Psychological Review with its variably curved connections between cues, variable, and response, and with the underlying “laissez-faire policy for the ecology.”
Representative design and social perception
Clark Leavitt Ohio State University E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
I am currently writing up the first study in a program designed to explore the ramifications of applying ecologically representative design to responses used in social perception research. The study briefly reviews the roots of the ecological approach in the work of both Brunswik and Gibson, pointing to the relative neglect of procedures for formal definition
and selection of response variables in both traditions. Recent research in social perception using the ‘ecological approach’, particularly the perception of traits from reduced stimuli, is examined and commonly used procedures are indicated. Factor analyses of ratings of snapshots are presented to demonstrate the effects of neglecting response selection procedures. Dimensions revealed by the factor structure reflect
The second study will apply representative design of response variables to ratings of ordinary daily events to test the emergence of the hypothesized adaptive dimensions.
Clinical Judgment Analysis of Patient Prioritisation for Elective General Surgery
Andrew D. MacCormick Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland E-mail: email@example.com
The basic topic of investigation is the prioritisation of patients for elective general surgery. In New Zealand the health care system is state funded. There is excess demand over supply of elective surgical services. Previously clinicians had organised waiting lists for operations on the basis of three categories, namely; urgent, semi urgent and routine. In reforms undertaken in the 1990’s there was an attempt to move away from waiting lists to a system by which patients were given certainty as to if and when they would receive surgery (the “booking system”). To do this Clinical Priority Assessment Criteria (CPAC) were developed. These are algorithms by which a score is generated. This score is used to determine a patient’s access to surgery. The benefit of the algorithms was that they provided transparency to the prioritisation process and could possibly lead to improved reliability. Unfortunately some of these CPAC were designed without clinical input and didn’t reflect clinical judgement. For example one algorithm failed to prioritise patients with malignant
Therefore we felt that SJT was applicable. It would enable us to provide a transparent method of prioritising that still reflected clinical judgement.
Work to date Our first step was to determine the cues/criteria that surgeons felt they used in priority setting. This was performed using the repertory grid technique.
We then investigated how surgeons used
criteria i.e. their policy. This was
Newsletter 2002 page 18 of 28