The Cinderella of psychology: the neglect of motor control in the science of mental life and behavior. Rosenbaum, D. Am Psychol, 60(4):308–17, 2005. ![The Cinderella of psychology: the neglect of motor control in the science of mental life and behavior [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper doi abstract bibtex One would expect psychology–the science of mental life and behavior–to place great emphasis on the means by which mental life is behaviorally expressed. Surprisingly, however, the study of how decisions are enacted–the focus of motor control research–has received little attention in psychology. This article documents the neglect and considers possible reasons for it. The hypotheses considered include three that are raised and then rejected: (a) no famous psychologists have studied motor control, (b) cognitive psychologists are mainly interested in uniquely human functions, and (c) motor control is simply too hard to study. Three other hypotheses are more viable: (d) cognitive psychologists have been more interested in epistemology than in action, (e) psychologists have disfavored motor control because overt responses were the only admissible measure in behaviorism, and (f) psychologists have felt that neuroscientists have the market cornered when it comes to motor control research. There are signs that motor control's Cinderella status is changing.
@article{rosenbaum_cinderella_2005,
title = {The {Cinderella} of psychology: the neglect of motor control in the science of mental life and behavior},
volume = {60},
url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=15943523},
doi = {10/fnb7t2},
abstract = {One would expect psychology--the science of mental life and behavior--to place great emphasis on the means by which mental life is behaviorally expressed. Surprisingly, however, the study of how decisions are enacted--the focus of motor control research--has received little attention in psychology. This article documents the neglect and considers possible reasons for it. The hypotheses considered include three that are raised and then rejected: (a) no famous psychologists have studied motor control, (b) cognitive psychologists are mainly interested in uniquely human functions, and (c) motor control is simply too hard to study. Three other hypotheses are more viable: (d) cognitive psychologists have been more interested in epistemology than in action, (e) psychologists have disfavored motor control because overt responses were the only admissible measure in behaviorism, and (f) psychologists have felt that neuroscientists have the market cornered when it comes to motor control research. There are signs that motor control's Cinderella status is changing.},
number = {4},
journal = {Am Psychol},
author = {Rosenbaum, D.A.},
year = {2005},
keywords = {\#nosource, *Cognition, *Psychological Theory, *Psychomotor Performance, *Social Behavior, Humans, Psychology/*trends},
pages = {308--17},
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"24trxxwrZYQrRo7C8","bibbaseid":"rosenbaum-thecinderellaofpsychologytheneglectofmotorcontrolinthescienceofmentallifeandbehavior-2005","author_short":["Rosenbaum, D."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"The Cinderella of psychology: the neglect of motor control in the science of mental life and behavior","volume":"60","url":"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=15943523","doi":"10/fnb7t2","abstract":"One would expect psychology–the science of mental life and behavior–to place great emphasis on the means by which mental life is behaviorally expressed. Surprisingly, however, the study of how decisions are enacted–the focus of motor control research–has received little attention in psychology. This article documents the neglect and considers possible reasons for it. The hypotheses considered include three that are raised and then rejected: (a) no famous psychologists have studied motor control, (b) cognitive psychologists are mainly interested in uniquely human functions, and (c) motor control is simply too hard to study. Three other hypotheses are more viable: (d) cognitive psychologists have been more interested in epistemology than in action, (e) psychologists have disfavored motor control because overt responses were the only admissible measure in behaviorism, and (f) psychologists have felt that neuroscientists have the market cornered when it comes to motor control research. There are signs that motor control's Cinderella status is changing.","number":"4","journal":"Am Psychol","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Rosenbaum"],"firstnames":["D.A."],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"2005","keywords":"#nosource, *Cognition, *Psychological Theory, *Psychomotor Performance, *Social Behavior, Humans, Psychology/*trends","pages":"308–17","bibtex":"@article{rosenbaum_cinderella_2005,\n\ttitle = {The {Cinderella} of psychology: the neglect of motor control in the science of mental life and behavior},\n\tvolume = {60},\n\turl = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=15943523},\n\tdoi = {10/fnb7t2},\n\tabstract = {One would expect psychology--the science of mental life and behavior--to place great emphasis on the means by which mental life is behaviorally expressed. Surprisingly, however, the study of how decisions are enacted--the focus of motor control research--has received little attention in psychology. This article documents the neglect and considers possible reasons for it. The hypotheses considered include three that are raised and then rejected: (a) no famous psychologists have studied motor control, (b) cognitive psychologists are mainly interested in uniquely human functions, and (c) motor control is simply too hard to study. Three other hypotheses are more viable: (d) cognitive psychologists have been more interested in epistemology than in action, (e) psychologists have disfavored motor control because overt responses were the only admissible measure in behaviorism, and (f) psychologists have felt that neuroscientists have the market cornered when it comes to motor control research. There are signs that motor control's Cinderella status is changing.},\n\tnumber = {4},\n\tjournal = {Am Psychol},\n\tauthor = {Rosenbaum, D.A.},\n\tyear = {2005},\n\tkeywords = {\\#nosource, *Cognition, *Psychological Theory, *Psychomotor Performance, *Social Behavior, Humans, Psychology/*trends},\n\tpages = {308--17},\n}\n\n","author_short":["Rosenbaum, D."],"key":"rosenbaum_cinderella_2005","id":"rosenbaum_cinderella_2005","bibbaseid":"rosenbaum-thecinderellaofpsychologytheneglectofmotorcontrolinthescienceofmentallifeandbehavior-2005","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&dopt=Citation&list_uids=15943523"},"keyword":["#nosource","*Cognition","*Psychological Theory","*Psychomotor Performance","*Social Behavior","Humans","Psychology/*trends"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"html":""},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/marsicanus","dataSources":["MDN92uztrK9rBiHJj"],"keywords":["#nosource","*cognition","*psychological theory","*psychomotor performance","*social behavior","humans","psychology/*trends"],"search_terms":["cinderella","psychology","neglect","motor","control","science","mental","life","behavior","rosenbaum"],"title":"The Cinderella of psychology: the neglect of motor control in the science of mental life and behavior","year":2005}