Structuralism and Functionalism in Psychology: Definition and Influence

Psychology as a science is relatively new with its beginnings in the 1850s. Structuralism and functionalism were the two earliest schools of thought that established psychology as a science, subject to rigorous study and the scientific method.

Both functionalism and structuralism made important contributions to the development of modern psychology. In order to get an idea of how the field of psychology emerged and got to where it is today, it can be helpful to look at these older perspectives and the impact that they had.

What Was Structuralism in Psychology?

Structuralism emerged as the first school of thought in psychology. Wilhelm Wundt, is known as the “father of psychology” and was the founder of the first experimental psychology lab in Leipzig, Germany. He was inspired by the rigorous methods of experimentation in chemistry labs and applied this model to the study of the human mind, which eventually became known as structuralism.

Wundt’s lab launched the early experiments studying sensation and perception, and he eventually wrote the book “Principles of Physiological Psychology.” Similar to a water molecule being comprised of two hydrogen and one oxygen molecule, the mind was comprised of sensations and perceptions.

One of Wundt’s students, Edward B. Titchener, would later go on to formally establish and name this field of study, structuralism. His theory broke sensation down into four distinct properties: intensity, quality, duration, and extent. He indicated that sensations gave rise to perceptions, ideas, and thoughts. He developed rigorous lab methods to study these components of consciousness.

Titcher broke away from many of Wundt’s ideas and at times even misrepresented the teachings of his mentor. Wundt’s theories tended to be much more holistic than the ideas that Titchener later introduced in the United States.

Strengths of Structuralism

Structuralism is important because it is the first major school of thought in psychology. The structuralist school also influenced the development of experimental psychology in the United States.

While Wundt’s work helped to establish psychology as a separate science and contributed methods to experimental psychology, Titchener brought what he had learned to the United States, establishing a lab at Cornell University. There he developed the very first doctoral program in psychology. Due to the rigorous nature of Titchner’s experimental methods, it seemed evident that any future study required his presence. As a result, much of his teachings died with him.

Criticism of Structuralism

By today’s scientific standards, the experimental methods used to study the structures of the mind were too subjective—the use of introspection led to a lack of reliability in results and they could not be replicated by other scientists.

Other critics argue that structuralism was too concerned with internal behavior, which is not directly observable and cannot be accurately measured.

What Was Functionalism in Psychology?

Other theories also surfaced to vie for dominance in psychology. In response to structuralism, an American perspective known as functionalism emerged from thinkers such as the evolutionist Charles Darwin and William James.

William James believed that one could not study consciousness by breaking it down into parts. Rather, he sought to understand the purpose and function of human thoughts and subsequent behaviors. Inspired by Charles Darwin, he purported that cognitive processes evolved over time to help humans adapt and survive.

Functionalists sought to explain mental processes in a more systematic and accurate manner.

Other important functionalist thinkers included Edward Thorndike, John Dewey, Mary Whiton Calkins, Harvey Carr, Hermann Ebbinghaus, and John Angell.

Strengths of Functionalism

Functionalism was an important influence on psychology. It influenced the development of behaviorism and applied psychology. Functionalism also influenced the educational system, especially with regards to John Dewey’s belief that children should learn at the level for which they are developmentally prepared.

Criticism of Functionalism

Functionalism was criticized perhaps most famously by Wundt. “It is literature. It is beautiful, but it is not psychology,” he said of functionalist William James’ book The Principles of Psychology.

Structuralism vs. Functionalism

While these two schools of thought served as the foundation for the future developments of psychology, there were important differences between the two. They were like two sides of the same coin, with structuralism attempting to study consciousness from the bottom up, and functionalism taking a more top-down approach.

What Is the Relationship Between Functionalism and Structuralism?

Structuralism was the first school of thought to emerge in psychology. Functionalism was formed as a direct response to structuralism.

While the structuralists believed psychology was about understanding the basic components of consciousness such as sensation and perception, the functionalists believed the goal of psychology was to understand the purpose of thoughts and behaviors.

Similarities

While structuralism and functionalism took different approaches to understand human thought and behavior, they share a few important similarities. Both were interested in understanding how the elements of the mind worked together to produce actions.

Both schools of thought also wanted to know more about what happens in the mind in response to the environment.

How the Early Structuralists and Functionalists Differed

Structuralism studied the contents of the mind through the use of lab experiments and relied on introspection. Functionalism, on the other hand, was more interested in using direct observation and fieldwork in order to better understand the adaptive function of behavior in its environmental context.

Influence on Psychology

In 1906, Mary Whiton Calkins published an article in Psychological Review asking for a reconciliation between these two schools of thought. Structuralism and functionalism were not so different, she argued, since both are principally concerned with the conscious self.

Despite this, each side continued to cast aspersions on the other. William James wrote that structuralism had “plenty of school, but no thought,” while Wilhelm Wundt dismissed functionalism as “literature” as unscientific.