درون نگری

درون‌نگری عبارت است از مشاهده و ثبت ماهیت ادراک‌ها، اندیشه‌ها و احساس‌های خود.[۱]
به عبارت دیگر درون‌نگری یعنی تلاش برای توصیف فرآیندها و تجربیات روانی فرد توسط خود فرد. مثلا پس از اعمال یک محرک معین از فرد پرسیده می‌شود، هنگام تحریک چه احساسی را تجربه می‌کند؟ پاسخی که فرد به این پرسش می‌دهد اصطلاحاً با درون‌نگری بدست آمده‌است.
منبع [ویرایش]

↑ ادوارد دی اسمیت. سوزان نولن. باربارا ل فردریکسون. جفری ل لافتوس. داریل ج بم. استیفن مارن. «اول». در زمینه روان شناسی اتکینسون و هیلگارد. ترجمهٔ دکتر حسن رفیعی و دکتر محسن ارجمند. چاپ چهاردهم. تهران: ارجمند، ۱۳۹۰. ۲۲.
این یک نوشتار خُرد روان‌شناسی است. با گسترش آن به ویکی‌پدیا کمک کنید.
[نهفتن]
ن • ب • و
روان‌شناسی
تاریخ روان‌شناسی درگاه:روان‌شناسی روان‌شناس
شاخه‌های
پایه
ناهنجار علوم عاطفی علوم اعصاب عاطفی رفتارگرایی علوم اعصاب رفتاری شناختی علوم اعصاب شناختی مقایسه‌ای فرهنگی رشد افتراقی تکاملی تجربی هوش ریاضی شخصیت مثبت‌گرا زبان روان‌فیزیک روان‌کاراندام‌شناسی روان‌شناسی اجتماعی نظری
روان‌شناسی
کاربردی
رفتارکاوی کاربردی آزمون روانی بالینی جامعه رفتار مصرف‌کننده روان‌شناسی مشاوره‌ای آموزشی جنایی سلامت صنعتی و سازمان قانون رسانه نظامی سلامت شغل دین سیاسی روان‌سنجی مدرسه ورزش خودکشی‌شناسی سامانه‌ها شدآمد
روش‌شناسی‌ها
آزمایش روی جانوران پژوهش بایگانی ژنتیک رفتاری وراژن‌شناسی رفتاری موردپژوهی تحلیل محتوا تجربی پژوهش انسان مصاحبهها عصب‌تصویربرداری دیدبانی پژوهش کمی پژوهش کیفی سیاههٔ خودگزارش بررسی آماری
جهت‌گیری‌ها
Adlerian روان‌شناسی تحلیلی رفتارگرایی رفتاردرمانی شناختی Cognitivism توصیفی نظریه بوم‌سازگان‌ها هستی‌درمانی خانواده درمانی فمنیست‌درمانی گشتالت روان‌شناسی انسان‌گرایانه روایت‌درمانی فلسفه روانکاوی روان‌درمانی روان‌پویا رفتار درمانی معقول Transpersonal
روان‌شناسان
آلفرد آدلر گوردن آلپورت آلبرت بندورا آرون تمکین بک John Bowlby ریموند کاتل Kenneth and Mamie Clark آلبرت الیس اریک اریکسون Hans Eysenck Leon Festinger زیگموند فروید Harry Harlow Donald O. Hebb Clark L. Hull ویلیام جیمز کارل گوستاو یونگ Jerome Kagan Kurt Lewin Ivar Lovaas آبراهام مزلو دیوید مک کللند George A. Miller Neal E. Miller Walter Mischel ایوان پاولف ژان پیاژه کارل راجرز Stanley Schachter بی‌اف اسکینر ادوارد لی سرندایک John B. Watson ویلهلم وونت
فهرست‌ها
مبحث‌های مشاوره روان‌شناسی نشریه‌ها سازمان‌ها فهرست روان‌شناسان معروف نمای کلی روان‌درمانی‌ها روش‌های پژوهش مکتب‌ها گاه‌شمار موضوع‌ها
See also Wiktionary definition Wiktionary category Wikisource Wikimedia Commons Wikiquote Wikinews Wikibooks
رده‌ها: آگاهی خود سرچشمه‌های دانش شاخه‌های روان‌شناسی شناخت فلسفه علم

قس عربی

مطالعة النفس[1] وتسمى بالتأمل الباطنی[2] والفحص الباطنی، هی نظر المرء فی أفکاره أحاسیسه بنفسه.
[عدل]انظر أیضا

استبطان
[عدل]مراجع

^ (فارسیة) مطالعه - لغت نامه دهخدا
^ التعریف والنقد (1972) لعارف النکدی، ص. 180
بوابة علم النفس
تصنیفات: استعرافوعیرصدفلسفة علم النفس فلسفة العلوم ذات مصادر المعلومات علم النفس

قس انگلیسی

Introspection (or internal perception) is the self-examination of one's conscious thoughts and feelings.[1] In psychology, the process of introspection relies exclusively on the purposeful and rational self-observation of one's mental state; however, introspection is sometimes referenced in a spiritual context as the examination of one's soul. Introspection is closely related to the philosophical concept of human self-reflection, and is contrasted with external observation. Introspection has generally provided a privileged insight by providing access to our own mental states.[2] Introspection is not mediated by the interference of other sources of knowledge that one may acquire, the individual experience of the mind makes it unique from other processes. Introspection can determine any number of mental states including:sensory, bodily, cognitive, emotional,and so forth.[3]

Introspection has been a subject of philosophical discussion for thousands of years. The philosopher Plato is thought to have referenced introspection when he asked, "…why should we not calmly and patiently review our own thoughts, and thoroughly examine and see what these appearances in us really are?"[4][5] While introspection is applicable to many facets of philosophical thought, it is perhaps best known for its role in epistemology. In this context, introspection is often compared with perception, reason, memory, and testimony as a source of knowledge.[6]

Contents [show]
[edit]Introspection and psychology

[edit]Wundt
Wilhelm Wundt, the father of modern psychology, was the first to adopt introspection as a tool for use in the context of experimental psychology research.[1] Wundt was influenced by notable physiologists, such as Gustav Fechner, who used introspection as a means to study human sensory organs. Building upon this preexisting use of introspection in physiology, Wundt imposed exacting control over the use of introspection in his experimental laboratory at the University of Leipzig.[1] By requiring this stringent control, it became possible for other scientists to replicate Wundt's experiments elsewhere, and this advent would prove essential in the development of psychology as a modern, peer-reviewed scientific discipline.

[edit]Titchener
Edward Titchener was an early pioneer in experimental psychology and student of Wilhelm Wundt.[1] After earning his doctorate under the tutelage of Wundt at the University of Leipzig, Titchener made his way to Cornell University where he established his own laboratory and research.[1] At the time of Titchener's arrival at Cornell, psychology was still a fledgling discipline, especially in the United States. This being the case, Titchener was a key figure in bringing Wundt's ideas to America; however, in this capacity, Titchener was also responsible for misrepresenting some of Wundt's ideas to the American psychological establishment. This misrepresentation was especially evident in Titchener's conception of introspection. Titchener taught that introspection only served a purpose in the qualitative analysis of consciousness into its various parts.[1] This viewpoint stood in stark relief against Wundt's notion of introspection as a means to quantitatively measure the whole of conscious experience.[1] In other words, Titchener was exclusively interested in the individual components that comprised conscious experience, while Wundt, seeing little purpose in the analysis of individual components, focused on the synthesis of these constituent parts as a whole. Ultimately, Titchener's ideas would form the basis of the short-lived psychological theory of structuralism.[1]

[edit]Recent developments
Partially as a result of Titchener’s misrepresentation, introspection fell into diminished use after the death of Titchener and subsequent decline of structuralism.[1] Later psychological movements, such as functionalism and behaviorism, would come to reject introspection due to its lack of scientific reliability among other factors.[1] Functionalism, which originally arose in direct opposition to structuralism, opposed introspection because of its narrow focus on the elements of consciousness.[1] This focus was counter to functionalism’s emphasis on the purpose of consciousness and other psychological behavior. Behaviorism’s objection to introspection focused much more heavily on its lack of reliability and objectivity which conflicted with behaviorism’s focus on measurable behavior rather than consciousness or sensation.[1][7]

The more recently established cognitive psychology movement has been somewhat more accepting of introspection as an instrument for use in the study of psychological phenomenon. However, this limited use has generally only been made in experiments pertaining to internal thought and conducted under strict experimental conditions. For example, in the think aloud protocol investigators cue participants to speak their thoughts aloud, thus providing a means to study an active thought process without forcing an individual to comment on the process itself.[8]

[edit]Introspection and religion

[edit]Eastern spirituality
In Eastern Christianity, some of the concepts critical to addressing the needs of man such as sober introspection, called nepsis, are specific to watchfulness of the human heart and address the conflicts of the human nous, heart or mind. Also noetic understanding can not be circumvented nor satisfied by rationalizing or discursive thought (i.e. systemization).[citation needed]

[edit]Jainism
As per Jainism, each and every basic jain layman has to practice Pratikraman. Pratikraman (literally Sanskrit "introspection"), is a process of repentance of sins (prayaschit) during which Jains repent for their wrongdoings during their daily life, and remind themselves to refrain from doing so again. Devout Jains often do Pratikraman at least twice a day.[citation needed]

[edit]Hinduism
Swami Chinmayananda in his works emphasised the role of introspection in five stages, outlined in his book, Self Unfoldment:

[edit]Introspect
Look within and observe your thoughts, emotions and activities throughout the day, examining objectively the flaws and positive points.

[edit]Detect
Observe the wrong channels of emotions, thinking and responses which caused pain, anxiety, stress and sorrow. By clearly ascertaining the pain-giving nature of certain habits of thinking and acting, we send a strong message to our sub-conscious mind to be alert the next time this thought pattern occurs

[edit]Negate
The third stage is to become aware when the thought pattern is arising within. Detecting the destructive thought pattern previously gives objectivity and clarity to negate it as it rises. Nip it in the bud, as they say.

[edit]Substitute
Immediately, having negated the wrong pattern of thinking, one will find a release from those agitated thought patterns, and peace is regained. One must then embed a value corrolary to the destructive thought pattern and emphasise that in ones mind. For example, jealousy, once noted must be dropped and converted into admiration. Lust to love, impatience to patience, false speech to honesty.

[edit]Grow and be happy
The final is both a part of introspection as well as the result. When we have successfully overcome a tendency with our introspective thinking, we grow. Maturity is harnessed and developed within and thereafter we live a life of happiness. This higher way of living gives more joy and peace that we never again return to those destructive thoughts patterns as before.[9]

[edit]In fiction

Introspection (also referred to as internal dialogue, interior monologue, self-talk) is the fiction-writing mode used to convey a character's thoughts. As explained by Renni Browne and Dave King, "One of the great gifts of literature is that it allows for the expression of unexpressed thoughts…"[10]

According to Nancy Kress, a character's thoughts can greatly enhance a story: deepening characterization, increasing tension, and widening the scope of a story.[11] As outlined by Jack M. Bickham, thought plays a critical role in both scene and sequel.[12]

[edit]Criticisms

See also: Introspection illusion
Psychological research on cognition and attribution has asked people to report on their mental processes, for instance to say why they made a particular choice or how they arrived at a judgment. In some situations, these reports are clearly confabulated.[13] For example, people justify choices they have not in fact made.[14] Such results undermine the idea that those verbal reports are based on direct introspective access to mental content. Instead, judgements about one's own mind seem to be inferences from overt behavior, similar to judgements made about another person.[13] However, it is hard to assess whether these results only apply to unusual experimental situations, or if they reveal something about everyday introspection.[15] The theory of the adaptive unconscious suggests that a very large proportion of mental processes, even "high-level" processes like goal-setting and decision-making, are inaccessible to introspection.[16] Indeed, it is questionable how confident researchers can be in their own introspections.

One of the central implications of dissociations between consciousness and meta-consciousness is that individuals, presumably including researchers, can misrepresent their experiences to themselves. Jack and Roepstorff assert, ‘…there is also a sense in which subjects simply cannot be wrong about their own experiential states.’ Presumably they arrived at this conclusion by drawing on the seemingly self-evident quality of their own introspections, and assumed that it must equally apply to others. However, when we consider research on the topic, this conclusion seems less self-evident. If, for example, extensive introspection can cause people to make decisions that they later regret [2], then one very reasonable possibility is that the introspection caused them to ‘lose touch with their feelings’. In short, empirical studies suggest that people can fail to appraise adequately (i.e. are wrong about) their own experiential states.

Another question in regards to the veracious accountability of introspection is if researchers lack the confidence in their own introspections and those of their participants, then how can it gain legitimacy? Three strategies are accountable: identifying behaviors that establish credibility, finding common ground that enables mutual understanding, and developing a trust that allows one to know when to give the benefit of the doubt. That is to say, that words are only meaningful if validated by one's actions; When people report strategies, feelings or beliefs, their behaviors must correspond with these statements if they are to be believed.[17]

Even when their introspections are uninformative, people still give confident descriptions of their mental processes, being "unaware of their unawareness".[18] This phenomenon has been termed the introspection illusion and has been used to explain some cognitive biases[19] and belief in some paranormal phenomena.[20] When making judgements about themselves, subjects treat their own introspections as reliable, whereas they judge other people based on their behavior.[21] This can lead to illusions of superiority. For example, people generally see themselves as less conformist than others, and this seems to be because they do not introspect any urge to conform.[22] Another reliable finding is that people generally see themselves as less biased than everyone else, because they are not likely to introspect any biased thought processes.[21] These introspections are misleading, however, because biases work sub-consciously.

One experiment tried to give their subjects access to others' introspections. They made audio recordings of subjects who had been told to say whatever came into their heads as they answered a question about their own bias.[21] Although subjects persuaded themselves they were unlikely to be biased, their introspective reports did not sway the assessments of observers. When subjects were explicitly told to avoid relying on introspection, their assessments of their own bias became more realistic.[21]

[edit]See also

Thinking portal
Conceptual proliferation
Introversion
Mode (literature)
Phenomenology (philosophy)
Phenomenology (psychology)
Pratikramana
Psychonautics
Psychophysics
Rumination (psychology)
Self-awareness
Self-consciousness
Style (fiction)
[edit]References

^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Schultz, D. P.; Schultz, S. E. (2012). A history of modern psychology (10th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. pp. 67–77, 88–100. ISBN 13:978-1-133-31624-4.
^ W. Seager,Encyclopedia of Consciousness' '
^ W. Seager,Encyclopedia of Consciousness
^ Theaetetus, 155
^ J Perner et al (2007). "Introspection & remembering". Synthese. Springer.
^ Epistemology. (2005). In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology/#SOU
^ Wilson, Robert Andrew; Keil, Frank C. (Eds.) (2001). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (MITECS). Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. ISBN [ Special:BookSources/0-262-73144-7|0-262-73144-7 ]. Cf. p.xx
^ Hayes, S. C. (1986). The case of the silent dog—Verbal reports and the analysis of rules: A review of Ericsson and Simon's Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data1. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 45(3), 351. doi:10.1901/jeab.1986.45-351
^ Self Unfoldment, Central Chinmaya Mission Trust, Mumbai
^ Browne, Renni; King, David (2004). Self-Editing for Fiction Writers: How to Edit Yourself into Print. New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers Inc.. ISBN 0-06-054569-0.
^ Kress, Nancy (2003). "Make "Em Think". Writer's Digest (August): pp. 38.
^ Bickham, Jack M. (1993). Scene & Structure. Cincinnati, OH: Writer's Digest Books. pp. 12–22, 50–58. ISBN 0-89879-551-6.
^ a b Nisbett, Richard E.; Timothy D. Wilson (1977). "Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes". Psychological Review 8: 231–259., reprinted in David Lewis Hamilton, ed. (2005). Social cognition: key readings. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0-86377-591-8.
^ Johansson, Petter; Lars Hall, Sverker Sikström, Betty Tärning, Andreas Lind (2006). "How something can be said about telling more than we can know: On choice blindness and introspection". Consciousness and Cognition (Elsevier) 15 (4): 673–692. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2006.09.004. PMID 17049881.
^ White, Peter A. (1988). "Knowing more about what we can tell: 'Introspective access' and causal report accuracy 10 years later". British Journal of Psychology (British Psychological Society) 79 (1): 13–45. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1988.tb02271.x.
^ Wilson, Timothy D.; Elizabeth W. Dunn (2004). "Self-Knowledge: Its Limits, Value, and Potential for Improvement". Annual Review of Psychology 55: 493–518. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141954. PMID 14744224.
^ Jonathan W Schooler
^ Wilson, Timothy D.; Yoav Bar-Anan (August 22, 2008). "The Unseen Mind". Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 321 (5892): 1046–1047. doi:10.1126/science.1163029. PMID 18719269.
^ Pronin, Emily (January 2007). "Perception and misperception of bias in human judgment". Trends in Cognitive Sciences (Elsevier) 11 (1): 37–43. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.001. ISSN 1364-6613. PMID 17129749.
^ Wegner, Daniel M. (2008). "Self is Magic". In John Baer, James C. Kaufman, Roy F. Baumeister. Are we free?: psychology and free will. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-518963-6. Retrieved 2008-07-02.
^ a b c d Pronin, Emily; Matthew B. Kugler (July 2007). "Valuing thoughts, ignoring behavior: The introspection illusion as a source of the bias blind spot". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (Elsevier) 43 (4): 565–578. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.011. ISSN 0022-1031.
^ Pronin, Emily; Jonah Berger, Sarah Molouki (2007). "Alone in a Crowd of Sheep: Asymmetric Perceptions of Conformity and Their Roots in an Introspection Illusion". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (American Psychological Association) 92 (4): 585–595. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.4.585. ISSN 022-3514. PMID 17469946.
[edit]Further reading

Boring, Edwin G. (1953). "A history of introspection". Psychological Bulletin 50 (3): 169–189. doi:10.1037/h0090793. PMID 13056096. Retrieved 2009-07-17.
Gillespie, Alex (2006). "Descartes’ demon: A dialogical analysis of ‘Meditations on First Philosophy". Theory & Psychology 16 (6): 761–781. doi:10.1177/0959354306070527.
Gillespie, Alex (2007). Valsiner, Jaan & Rosa, Alberto. ed. The social basis of self-reflection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 678–691.
Jack, Anthony & Roepstorff, Andreas, ed. (2003). Trusting the subject?: The use of introspective evidence in cognitive science. Imprint Academic. ISBN 978-0-907845-56-0.
Wilson, Timothy (2002). Strangers to Ourselves: Discovering the Adaptive Unconscious. Cambridge: Belknap Press. ISBN 0-674-00936-3.
Wilson, Timothy D. Wilson; Sara D. Hodges (1992). "Attitudes as Temporary Constructions". In Leonard L. Martin, Abraham Tesser. The Construction of social judgments. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN 978-0-8058-1149-0.
[edit]External links

Look up introspection in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Introspection entry by Eric Schwitzgebel in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
Introspection in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
[show] v t e
Psychology
[show] v t e
Philosophy of mind
View page ratings
Rate this page
What's this?
Trustworthy
Objective
Complete
Well-written
I am highly knowledgeable about this topic (optional)

Submit ratings
Categories: CognitionSources of