What is functionalism school of thought in psychology?

A psychological approach, popular in the early part of the twentieth century, that focused on how consciousness functions to help human beings adapt to their environment.

The goal of the first psychologists was to determine the structure of consciousness just as chemists had found the structure of chemicals. Thus, the school of psychology associated with this approach earned the name structuralism. This perspective began in Germany in the laboratory of Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920).

Before long, however, psychologists suggested that psychology should not concern itself with the structure of consciousness because, they argued, consciousness was always changing so it had no basic structure. Instead, they suggested that psychology should focus on the function or purpose of consciousness and how it leads to adaptive behavior. This approach to psychology was consistent with Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, which exerted a significant impact on the character of psychology. The school of functionalism developed and flourished in the United States, which quickly surpassed Germany as the primary location of scientific psychology.

In 1892, George Trumbull Ladd (1842-1921), one of the early presidents of the American Psychological Association, had declared that objective psychology should not replace the subjective psychology of the structuralists. By 1900, however, most psychologists agreed with a later president, Joseph Jastrow, that psychology was the science of mental content, not of structure. At that point, structuralism still had some adherents, but it was fast becoming a minor part of psychology.

The early functionalists included the pre-eminent psychologist and philosopher William James. James promoted the idea that the mind and consciousness itself would not exist if it did not serve some practical, adaptive purpose. It had evolved because it presented advantages. Along with this idea, James maintained that psychology should be practical and should be developed to make a difference in people's lives.

One of the difficulties that concerned the functionalists was how to reconcile the objective, scientific nature of psychology with its focus on consciousness, which by its nature is not directly observable. Although psychologists like William James accepted the reality of consciousness and the role of the will in people's lives, even he was unable to resolve the issue of scientific acceptance of consciousness and will within functionalism.

Other functionalists, like John Dewey, developed ideas that moved ever farther from the realm that structuralism had created. Dewey, for example, used James's ideas as the basis for his writings, but asserted that consciousness and the will were not relevant concepts for scientific psychology. Instead, the behavior is the critical issue and should be considered in the context in which it occurs. For example, a stimulus might be important in one circumstance, but irrelevant in another. A person's response to that stimulus depends on the value of that stimulus in the current situation. Thus, practical and adaptive responses characterize behavior, not some unseen force like consciousness.

This dilemma of how to deal with a phenomenon as subjective as consciousness within the context of an objective psychology ultimately led to the abandonment of functionalism in favor of behaviorism, which rejected everything dealing with consciousness. By 1912, very few psychologists regarded psychology as the study of mental content—the focus was on behavior instead. As it turned out, the school of functionalism provided a temporary framework for the replacement of structuralism, but was itself supplanted by the school of behaviorism.

Interestingly, functionalism drew criticism from both the structuralists and from the behaviorists. The structuralists accused the functionalists of failing to define the concepts that were important to functionalism. Further, the structuralists declared that the functionalists were simply not studying psychology at all; psychology to a structuralist involved mental content and nothing else. Finally, the functionalists drew criticism for applying psychology; the structuralists opposed applications in the name of psychology.

On the other hand, behaviorists were uncomfortable with the functionalists' acceptance of consciousness and sought to make psychology the study of behavior. Eventually, the behavioral approach gained ascendance and reigned for the next half century.

Functionalism was important in the development of psychology because it broadened the scope of psychological research and application. Because of the wider perspective, psychologists accepted the validity of research with animals, with children, and with people having psychiatric disabilities. Further, functionalists introduced a wide variety of research techniques that were beyond the boundaries of structural psychology, like physiological measures, mental tests, and questionnaires. The functionalist legacy endures in psychology today.

Some historians have suggested that functional psychology was consistent with the progressivism that characterized American psychology at the end of the nineteenth century: more people were moving to and living in urban areas, science seemed to hold all the answers for creating a Utopian society, educational reform was underway, and many societal changes faced America. It is not surprising that psychologists began to consider the role that psychology could play in developing a better society.

Biro, J.I., and Robert W. Shahan, eds. Mind, Brain, and Function: Essays in the Philosophy of Mind. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1982.

Leahey, T. H. A History of Modern Psychology. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1994.

Putnam, Hilary. Representation and Reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1988.

Schultz, D. P., and S. E. Schultz. A History of Modern Psychology. 6th ed. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 1996.

TDL is an applied research consultancy. In our work, we leverage the insights of diverse fields—from psychology and economics to machine learning and behavioral data science—to sculpt targeted solutions to nuanced problems.

Our consulting services

Functionalism is a psychological philosophy that describes the mind as a functional tool that allows us to adapt to our environments. It posits that our mental states and behaviors are survival mechanisms, in line with our inherent biological goals. Sound like evolution? That’s because functionalism, or functional psychology, stems directly from Darwin’s school of thought, emerging in the late 19th century as a counter to the prevailing theory of structuralism. Unlike structuralism, which tries to simply understand our subjective experience of consciousness, functionalism also aims to find meaning and purpose in what we experience.

“

The greatest discovery of my generation is that a human being can alter his life by altering his attitudes.

– William James, American Psychologist

Our consulting services

An approach to psychology that analyses mental states and behaviors in terms of their purposes, placing an emphasis on the broad capability of the human mind. Functionalism marked a major departure from conventional ‘structuralist’ ideas in psychology from the 19th century onwards.

Structuralism

The precursor to functionalism, which advocates for an ‘introspective’ approach to psychology, focusing on understanding the individual structures that make up our consciousness.

Evolutionary Psychology

A strand of psychology that considers our mental processes, emotions and behaviors as strategies we use in order to adapt to and survive in our environments.

The origins of functionalism are traced back to William James, the renowned American psychologist of the late 19th century.1 James was heavily influenced by Darwin’s theory of evolution, and was critical of the structural approach to psychology that had dominated the field since its inception. James argued that instead of focusing on the specific ‘introspective’ elements that make up our consciousness, psychology should consider the purpose of consciousness, psychological states, and behavior.

Although James is credited as being the first to advocate for a functional approach to psychology, the school of functionalism itself did not fully emerge until later in the 19th century, when scholars at the University of Chicago began to formalise the theory. It was here that John Dewey, Harvey A. Carr and James Rowland Angell would all develop functionalism, focusing especially on the biological and animal dimensions of learning and behavior. Another group of functionalists would emerge in Columbia University, most notably Edward Thorndike. Thorndike’s work on reinforcement theory and behavior analysis provided the basis for the empirical laws that emerged under behaviorism later in the 20th century.2

As functional psychology developed, so too did the field of experimental psychology. Most functionalists of the early 20th century also pioneered novel techniques in lab and field analyses of human and animal behavior. The experimental method in psychology has led to major breakthroughs in our understanding of the functional organization of our brains, as psychologists continue to use experiments to manipulate certain variables that may explain our behavior.

Often considered the father of American psychology, James was one of the first to advocate a functional approach to the field. William James was a Harvard Professor and leading thinker of late 19th century America.

Thorndike’s research of animal behaviour and the learning process led to the law of effect which states that, through a process of trial and error, subjects find the most satisfying behavioral responses to specific stimuli, and these become their most used responses in the future.

American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer, Dewey’s 1896 paper “The Reflex Arc Concept in Psychology” is considered the first major work of functionalism.

Carr was an American psychologist and Chairman of the University of Chicago’s Psychology Department (which had become the hub of the Functionalist movement) between 1926-1938. He is best known for the Kerplunk Experiment, a famous stimulus and response test conducted on rats, which he ran with John Watson.

Functionalism had an important influence on the trajectory of psychology from the 19th century onward. Once functionalism took off, most structuralist ideas – which had previously dominated the field – were disputed and didn’t make their way into the modern psychology we know today. Most notably, functionalism led directly to the emergence of behaviorism in the mid 20th century, which views human behavior as a type of ‘reflex’ in response to external stimuli.

Famous behaviorists including B.F. Skinner and Iain Pavlov based many of their ideas around reinforcement learning and conditioning on the findings of functionalists. You’ve likely heard of Pavlov’s famous classical conditioning experiment in which he conditioned dogs to salivate at the sound of a bell. That probably wouldn’t have happened without functionalism, which was the starting point for studies that considered our mental processes and behaviour as responses to external stimuli. The field of behaviorism and its practical application in Applied Behavior Analysis (which uses empirical approaches to encourage positive behaviour) would go on to become a hugely popular philosophy in clinical psychology, and continues to be used today as an intervention for people with conditions such as autism, dementia and addiction.3

Functionalism also had a direct influence on the education system in the US. This was largely due to John Dewey’s theory that children should learn at the pace that best suits their level of intellectual development, and that the curriculum should encourage students to draw from their own interests and experiences.1 Functionalist and behaviorist ideas are also used in special education settings as tools for positive behavior support.

Finally, the experimental tradition that grew up alongside functionalism brought a wide range of research methods that are still used in modern psychology today. These include observation studies, physiological measures, mental tests, and questionnaires.

Functionalism is sometimes considered the bridge between early structuralist-based ideas, and modern behaviorism. Naturally, it has received criticism from both schools of thought.

At first, structuralists argued that functionalism did not fully define or attempt to understand the mental processes they were dealing with. Instead of trying to explain mental states and behaviors in the context of environmental stimuli, structuralists believed that psychologists should focus on introspection and understanding these aspects of consciousness for what they are. They also argued against the applied nature of functional psychology, believing that it distracted from the core goal of identifying the structures of consciousness.

Behaviorists in the mid-late 20th century would also take issue with some aspects of functionalism. While functionalists believed it was important to accept the role of consciousness and internal cognitions such as pre-existing beliefs, behaviorists were only concerned with the study of human behavior, and rejected any idea that did not view mental states as directly influenced by external stimuli.4

We all hold personal beliefs, often based on experience or knowledge, things we learned ourselves, or picked up from other people. A functional approach to beliefs would argue that beliefs are designed to serve a particular purpose and help us achieve specific goals. Researchers have explored a broad range of beliefs from this perspective. For example, holding the belief that we have something in common with a group allows us to ‘fit in’ better. Having a positive self-image helps us protect our egos, and believing that a particular situation could be risky (e.g. driving under the influence of alcohol) prevents us from causing harm to ourselves and others.6

Beliefs can be surprisingly accurate, and humans make thousands of useful decisions a day based on subconscious beliefs. For example, when you press the ‘on’ button on your remote control, you do so with the belief that it will cause the TV to turn on. That said, many of our beliefs come from deeper cognitive processes, like biases and heuristics. For example, we might believe that a beauty product is guaranteed to make us look 10 years younger, simply because it was mentioned in the first review we read (see the anchoring bias). Granted, these types of beliefs can get us into trouble from time to time, but functionalists will argue that they still do serve a purpose. In this case, we probably get short-term pleasure from the idea that we could look younger, as well as the fact that we didn’t need to spend much time reading to get the answer we wanted!

Why do we tend to think that things that happened recently are more likely to happen again?

Sometimes our beliefs are biased based on how available they are to us in the moment. Check out the availability heuristic to understand how this happens, and how it can skew our decision making.

Why do we look for consistency in our beliefs?

Cognitive dissonance occurs when our beliefs and our behavior don’t align, often leading to internal dilemmas.

Encyclopedia Britannica. (2021). Functionalism | psychology. Retrieved 15 February 2021, from https://www.britannica.com/science/functionalism-psychology.
How Structuralism and Functionalism Influenced Early Psychology. (2021). Retrieved 15 February 2021, from https://www.verywellmind.com/structuralism-and-functionalism-2795248
Morris, E. K., Altus, D. E., & Smith, N. G. (2013). A study in the founding of applied behavior analysis through its publications. The Behavior Analyst, 36(1), 73-107.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2021). Functionalism. Retrieved 15 February 2021, from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/functionalism/
Cummins, R. (1975). Functional explanation. Journal of Philosophy, 72, 741-764.
Boden, M. T., Berenbaum, H., & Gross, J. J. (2016). Why do people believe what they do? A functionalist perspective. Review of General Psychology, 20(4), 399-411.