00:59Is it reasonable for psychology programs to restrict admission of humanities-track students?

04:48Is psychology a humanities or a science subject?

15:49What is the difference between a psychologist or researcher and a psychological counselor?

 

Hello, I’m Wang Fang! Time goes by—the first part of the program is complete. To celebrate, I asked my dear colleague Xiaxia to gather representative questions from listeners in the comments since the program launched. Today I will answer them together.

I certainly won’t admit that the real reason is that my stock of finished episodes is running low. What can I do? Warning: the schedule may go blank! Xiaxia said, “Make a Q&A episode. Our listeners are wonderfully kind people!” I took that to mean I could pad an episode and get away with it—please promise you did not hear that. All right, let us answer seriously.

The first questions concern psychology as a discipline. Someone asked as early as the introductory episode:Is it reasonable for psychology programs to restrict humanities-track applicants? Is psychology part of the humanities or sciences?

Good question! In my undergraduate personality psychology course at Beijing Normal University, I devote an entire class to complaining about this. There are really two issues: one concernswhether dividing students into humanities and sciences is reasonable, and the other concernspsychology’s own disciplinary position.Let us take them one at a time.

Most highly ranked psychology departments in China currently admit only science-track students through the national university entrance examination. If psychology remains housed in a school of education or philosophy at some university, it may also accept humanities-track students. This is of course related to psychology itself, which we will discuss shortly. Before that, do you not think that forcibly separating humanities and sciences is itself rather unscientific?

Does dividing all knowledge in human history into just humanities and sciences sound familiar? We noted in Episode One thatthe greatest problem with categorical thinking is that it exaggerates differences between groups and overlooks differences within them.According to modern theories of multiple intelligences, there is no such thing as a humanities brain or a science brain. We possess several forms of intelligence simultaneously, and they do not operate in isolation; most of the time they cooperate. For rapidly developing secondary-school students, choices may reflect interest more than ability. Someone good at science may not excel in every science subject, nor lack interest in every humanities subject.

As for me, without a recommendation-based admission opportunity, I intended to apply for Chinese literature. I had followed the science track, and that year only a handful of universities admitted a tiny number of science students to Chinese departments in my province. I remember Xiaxia answering that psychology majors take many mathematical and scientific courses, which is true. But we often forget that psychology also involves many humanities and social-science courses—personality psychology is a representative example. Does this imply that humanities students cannot master scientific content, while science students can master humanities content?

No one says so explicitly, but I believe this implicit stereotype exists. One potential consequence is the self-labeling discussed earlier, now with a hierarchy attached: even two tracks generate a chain of contempt. People continually solidify it through jokes about humanities students, perhaps reflecting a broader belief in the superiority of natural science—recall debates claiming that the humanities harm the nation. In short,once students accept and internalize such a label, it restricts their development. Beginning in secondary school, that restriction may last a lifetime. University entrance reforms in recent years let students in many provinces select individual subjects. Though seemingly more complex, this is actually more scientific from the perspective I have described.

Returning to our question,is psychology part of the humanities or sciences?After what I have just said, this division is already unsuitable, but let us first follow conventional thinking.

My students have answers: some classes are humanities and others sciences; or psychology is science during the semester and humanities at the final exam, because teachers constantly emphasize that psychology is a science, yet everything must be memorized for the test.

The public’s confusion is understandable. Historically, psychology was born from philosophy and benefited from biology. We often say thatpsychology has a philosophical mother and a biological father. At its origin, then, it was interdisciplinary, combining humanistic and scientific qualities and walking on two legs.

Its humanistic nature lies in theories and research topics inherited and shared with philosophy: the essence of human nature and meaning of existence, the relationship between reason and emotion, whether knowledge is innate or acquired, and the laws by which the mind operates. Psychology, however, seeks to understand behavior, thought, and feeling through more empirical methods. It collects data about human experience and action, raising the problem of measuring mind and behavior. Personality tests are tools developed for this purpose. Instruments can also collect physiological data, such as breathing, heart rate, and skin conductance under stress, or activity in particular brain regions while we think.

With tools available, appropriate research designs are needed to test hypotheses. Suppose we want to know whether listening to music while working or studying affects performance. Participants can be assigned randomly to an experimental or control group and complete the same test; music plays for the experimental group while the control group remains in silence. Comparing test scores statistically lets us attribute any difference to the distinct treatment received by the groups. Psychological researchers must thereforechoose an appropriate design and method for each research question. Psychology students understandably require training in psychological measurement, statistics, experimental design, and even the use of instruments.

Psychology also seeks totest theories empirically rather than leave them at the level of speculation. Consequently, continuing empirical research challenges early theories. Some of Freud’s views, for example, may prove more suitable as ideas than as scientific theories; new evidence may also prompt existing theories to be revised and developed. This demonstrates the combination ofhumanistic and scientific qualities. Most psychological research is theory-driven and aims to test theory; each complements the other, and neither is dispensable.

Over the past twenty or thirty years, however, one of psychology’s two legs has clearly taken longer strides: scientifically oriented psychology has developed faster.Psychologists of the past were usually thinkers; today they are largely scientists, and only a few, such as Steven Pinker and Jonathan Haidt, combine both identities well.

This naturally relates to developments within psychology and associated disciplines. The cognitive revolution spurred cognitive psychology and later cognitive neuroscience, clarifying mechanisms of human perception, memory, thought, language, and more. Applications of molecular biology and behavioral genetics in psychology and psychiatry let us understand how genetic composition and biochemical reactions in the brain influence emotion and behavior, and greatly improved knowledge of causes of psychological abnormalities, especially mental illness.

These developments are undoubtedly exciting and have strengthened psychology’s scientific identity, but they also provoke concern that the human quality of a discipline whose subject is the human being is gradually fading.Can the human brain be equated completely with a computer? Clearly not. Computers are entirely rational, while the human brain is often inexplicably irrational. Can human nature be reduced completely to molecules? Does adjusting disordered brain chemistry with medication truly restore psychological health? I will address this issue in Part Two.

In short, although mainstream frontier psychology now focuses more on humanity’s biological nature, human sociality, complicated and conflicted desires and needs, and the search for and interrogation of meaning cannot be fully explained within a purely natural-scientific framework. Psychology’s intellectual and humanistic dimensions must be emphasized and defended. This concern also appears in universities, perhaps especially in China. For historical reasons, psychology was once denounced during the Cultural Revolution as idealism and pseudoscience. The trauma lingers, prompting the discipline to stand more firmly with natural science. Psychology is a science, admits only science students, and adopts a natural-scientific orientation in frontier research; society displays natural-science superiority, while psychology itself shows post-traumatic stress. The growing bias toward its scientific leg is therefore understandable.

Within academic psychology there is even ahierarchy of contempt: brain researchers using instruments such as fMRI look down on behavioral and cognitive experimenters; experimenters look down on survey researchers; survey researchers look down on those without data. Clearly this is a hierarchyconstructed from research methods.When applying to the National Natural Science Foundation, professors often feel they need several instrument-based cognitive-neuroscience studies to stand a chance.Because psychology studies people, its questions seem soft; only its methods—especially those involving equipment—appear hard-core and scientific.

However,although psychology’s methodology broadly meets scientific standards, absolute objectivity is difficult. The unique quality of its human subjects is self-awareness: we can never become cold objects of observation like rocks, minerals, or molecules. Researchers are also human and constrained by theoretical positions and human weaknesses.Psychology has worked in recent years to correct this through greater transparency, large-scale replication to test stability, and improved ecological validity. Yet because its subject is intrinsically complex, psychology may never become a true natural science like physics or biology. More importantly,methods are merely tools of scientific research. If measurement precedes existence and method precedes the question, means have displaced ends. Psychology’s authentic purpose is to help us understand people, not to pursue perfect measurement techniques and equipment merely to become scientific.

I often tell students:technology is powerful but cold; you must give it human temperament and warmth. In other words, you must first understand people. Without that understanding, even the most scientific method is meaningless. As I often put it, any psychology without people is malpractice.

These internal dilemmas and reflections may seem irrelevant outside the discipline, but I share them so you can understand a little better what kind of field psychology is.

In my view,psychology combines warm humanity with solid science. In its Chinese name, “psyche” represents humanity and “logos” represents science; the two resemble yin and yang, merging as inner and outer aspects of one whole.Psychology is an interdisciplinary field, and that should be an advantage rather than an embarrassment. Through personality psychology, this program aims both to present findings from contemporary scientific psychology—more of which will appear from Part Two onward—and to introduce psychology’s rich theoretical and humanistic dimension, which has existed historically and continues evolving today. Part Three, for example, will focus on major personality theories.

Psychology remains young, with most progress occurring over roughly the past 150 years, and many problems remain. The greatest is the mismatch between its discoveries and humanity’s intense demand for self-understanding: people want to know so much, while psychology’s answers still lag behind. Nevertheless, I believeit offers a useful perspective and an interface between disciplines, connecting all knowledge related to human beings and ourselves.So forget the humanities-science divide. Knowledge and wisdom belong to all humanity!

 

The second question also concerns psychology itself:what is the difference between a psychologist or researcher and a psychological counselor?

Psychological counselingis probably the best-known branch of psychology. It ispractice- and application-oriented, dedicated to helping people relieve distress, solve psychological problems, and promote personal health and growth.

Counseling is a highly specialized profession, far more than sitting down to chat. Its methods belong to several schools with different principles and techniques: some focus on early experience, others on changing present thoughts; some use interpretation and analysis, others role-play. These therapies are generally based on particular theories. Several personality theories discussed in Part Three have produced corresponding counseling approaches. Each therapy has a complete set of technical principles and procedures that operate through interaction between counselor and client.

A qualified counselor therefore needs a solid theoretical foundation, mastery of one or more counseling and therapeutic techniques, knowledge of psychological measurement and assessment, and strong interpersonal and crisis-response skills. Counselors usually undergo lengthy training, supervision, and evaluation, including in ethics, to ensure substantial experience and professional integrity before independent practice.

Some people conduct counseling-related research without necessarily practicing. Working at universities or research institutes, they may develop assessment tools, formulate diagnostic standards, or test therapeutic effects. Their findings guide counselors in improving practice.

Counseling is neither mysterious nor omnipotent. It rests on solid theory, research, and technique and depends on your willingness to change and the effort you and your counselor make together.

However,counseling is part of psychology, but psychology is much more than counseling.Contemporary psychology has five pillar domains (APA, 2014). Counseling belongs to the fifth, mental and physical health, which includes abnormal psychology, health psychology, counseling, and therapy. The other four are Domain One:biological, including neuroscience, sensation, and consciousness; Domain Two:cognitive, including perception, memory, and intelligence; Domain Three:developmental, including learning, life-span development, and language; and Domain Four:social and personality, including social psychology, personality, emotion, culture, and gender. These five domains broadly define psychology’s territory and clearly reveal both scientific and humanistic themes. Each contains basic research and practical applications.

Research in social and personality psychology, for example, supports another major area of application beyond counseling: organizations, including personnel assessment, human-resource management, and management consulting. As businesses have increasingly valued consumers and users, psychology graduates are also widely needed in consumer and market research, product management, user experience, and user research at internet companies.

To learn more about psychology applications and career paths, the Faculty of Psychology at Beijing Normal University produced aPsychology Career Handbook, essentially a comprehensive guide to employment in psychology. I asked Xiaxia to attach it to the transcript for your reference.

Thank you for listening this far. I seem to have talked too much. What was meant to be one Q&A episode cannot possibly fit and must expand into three segments. I came here to pad the schedule and ended up adding content! Let us call it a special celebration of the final two weeks of 2021. Next I will discuss another personality test, the MBTI. If you are interested, see you in the next segment. I’m Wang Fang. Bye!