Lecture
Psychophysiology (psychological physiology) is a scientific discipline that emerged at the junction of psychology and physiology, the subject of its study are the physiological bases of mental activity and human behavior .
The term "psychophysiology" was proposed at the beginning of the 19th century by the French philosopher N. Massias and was originally used to denote a wide range of psychological studies that relied on precise objective physiological methods (definition of sensory thresholds, reaction time, etc.).
Closest to psychophysiology - physiological psychology, science, which arose in the late XIX century as a section of experimental psychology. The term "physiological psychology" was introduced by V. Wundt to refer to psychological research, borrowing methods and research results from human physiology. At present, physiological psychology is understood as a branch of psychological science that studies the physiological mechanisms of mental activity from the lowest to the highest levels of its organization (see Psychological Dictionary, 1996). Thus, the tasks of psychophysiology and physiological psychology practically coincide, and at present the differences between them are mostly terminological in nature.
However, there was a period in the history of Russian psychophysiology, when terminological differences were used to denote the productivity of the functional-systemic approach to the study of the human psyche and behavior that is taking shape in physiology. The selection of psychophysiology as an independent discipline in relation to physiological psychophysiology was conducted by A.R. Luria (1973). 
According to A.R. Luria, physiological psychology studies the basics of complex mental processes - motives and needs, sensations and perceptions, attention and memory, the most complex forms of speech and intellectual acts, i.e. separate mental processes and functions. It was formed as a result of the accumulation of a large amount of empirical material on the functioning of various physiological systems of the body in various mental states.
Unlike physiological psychology, where the subject is the study of individual physiological functions, the subject of psychophysiology, as emphasized by A.R. Luria, serves the behavior of a person or animal. In this case, the behavior is an independent variable, whereas the dependent variable are physiological processes. According to Luria, psychophysiology is the physiology of integral forms of mental activity, it arose as a result of the need to explain mental phenomena with the help of physiological processes, and therefore it compares the complex forms of human behavioral characteristics with physiological processes of varying degrees of complexity (see Chrestomat. 1.1) ( see Chrestomatic. 1.2).
The origins of these ideas can be found in the works of LS. Vygotsky, who first formulated the need to investigate the problem of the relationship between psychological and physiological systems, thus anticipating the basic perspective of the development of psychophysiology. (LS Vygotsky, 1982).
The theoretical and experimental foundations of this direction are the theory of functional systems PK Anokhin (1968), based on the understanding of mental and physiological processes as complex functional systems in which individual mechanisms are combined by a common task into whole, jointly operating complexes aimed at achieving a useful, adaptive result. The principle of self-regulation of physiological processes, formulated in the national physiology of N.A. Bernstein (1963) long before the advent of cybernetics and opened a completely new approach to the study of the physiological mechanisms of individual mental processes. As a result, the development of this direction in psychophysiology led to the emergence of a new field of research, called systemic psychophysiology (VB Shvyrkov, 1988; Yu.I. Aleksandrov, 1997). Particularly should be discussed the relationship of psychophysiology and neuropsychology.
By definition, neuropsychology is a branch of psychological science that has developed at the junction of several disciplines: psychology, medicine (neurosurgery, neurology), physiology - and aimed at studying the brain mechanisms of higher mental functions on the material of local brain lesions. The theoretical basis of neuropsychology is developed by А.Р. Luria's theory of systemic dynamic localization of mental processes.
Along with this, in recent decades, new methods have emerged (for example, positron emission tomography), which allow us to investigate the brain localization of higher mental functions in healthy people. Thus, modern neuropsychology, taken in its entirety of its problems, is focused on studying the brain organization of mental activity, not only in pathology, but also in normal conditions. Accordingly, the range of research on neuropsychology has expanded; such areas as the neuropsychology of individual differences, age neuropsychology have appeared (see Readings on neuropsychology, 1999). The latter actually leads to erasing the boundaries between neuropsychology and psychophysiology.
Finally, it is necessary to point out the relationship between the physiology of GNI and psychophysiology. Higher Nervous Activity (GNI) is a concept introduced by I.P. Pavlov, for many years identified with the concept of "mental activity". Thus, the physiology of higher nervous activity was the physiology of mental activity, or psychophysiology.
The well-founded methodology and the wealth of experimental methods of the physiology of GNI had a decisive influence on research in the field of the physiological bases of human behavior, hindering, however, the development of those studies that did not fit into the Procrustean bed of physiology of GNI. In 1950, the so-called Pavlov session, devoted to problems of psychology and physiology, took place. At this session, it was about the need for the revival of Pavlovian teachings. For avoiding this teaching, the creator of the theory of functional systems PK Anokhin and some other prominent scientists.
The consequences of the Pavlovian session were very dramatic for psychology. In the early 50s. Twentieth century. there was a violent introduction of Pavlovsky doctrine into psychology. According to A.V. Petrovsky (1967), in fact, there was a tendency to the elimination of psychology and its replacement by Pavlov's physiology of GNI.
Officially, the state of affairs changed in 1962, when the All-Union Conference on the Philosophical Issues of the Physiology of Higher Nervous Activity and Psychology was held.
It was forced to state the significant changes that occurred in science in the postwar years. Briefly describing these changes, it is necessary to emphasize the following.
In connection with the intensive development of the new physiological experiment, and above all with the advent of electroencephalography, the scope of experimental studies of the brain mechanisms of the mind and behavior of humans and animals began to expand. The EEG method made it possible to look into the subtle physiological mechanisms underlying mental processes and behavior. The development of microelectrode technology, experiments with electrical stimulation of various brain formations with the help of implanted electrodes, opened a new line of research in the study of the brain. The increasing importance of computing, information theory, cybernetics, etc. required the rethinking of the traditional provisions of the physiology of GNI and the development of new theoretical and experimental paradigms.
Thanks to the post-war innovations, foreign psychophysiology, which had been engaged for many years in the study of physiological processes and functions of a person in various mental states (Hasset, 1981), was also significantly transformed. In 1982, Canada hosted the First International Congress of Psychophysiology, at which the International Psycho-Physiological Association was established and the journal International Journal of Psychophysiology (International Journal of Psychophisiology) was established.
The intensive development of psychophysiology contributed to the fact that the International Organization for the Study of the Brain declared the last decade of the twentieth century. "Decade of the brain." Within the framework of this international program, comprehensive studies were carried out aimed at integrating all aspects of brain knowledge and the principles of its work. For example, in 1993, the Bright Spot International Research Center for the Neurobiology of Consciousness was established at the Institute of VND and the NF RAS.
Experiencing a period of intensive growth on this basis, the science of the brain, including psychophysiology, came close to solving such problems that were previously inaccessible. These include, for example, the physiological mechanisms and patterns of coding information, the chronometry of the processes of cognitive activity, etc.
Trying to imagine the appearance of modern psychophysiology, B.I. Kochubey (1990) identifies three new characteristics: activism, selectivism, and informativism.
Activism implies the rejection of ideas about a person as a being passively reacting to external influences, and a transition to a new “model” of a person - an active person, directed by internally given goals, capable of arbitrary self-regulation.
Selectivism characterizes the increasing differentiation in the analysis of physiological processes and phenomena, which allows you to put them on a par with subtle psychological processes.
Informativism reflects the reorientation of physiology from the study of energy exchange with the environment to the exchange of information. The concept of information, having entered psychophysiology in the 60s, became one of the most important in describing the physiological mechanisms of human cognitive activity.
Thus, modern psychophysiology as a science about the physiological bases of mental activity and behavior is a field of knowledge that combines physiological psychology, physiology of GNI, "normal" neuropsychology and systemic psychophysiology. Taken in full, their tasks psychophysiology includes three relatively independent parts: general, age and differential psychophysiology. Each of them has its own subject of study, tasks and methodological techniques.
The subject of general psychophysiology is the physiological basis (correlates, mechanisms, patterns) of mental activity and human behavior. General psychophysiology studies the physiological bases of cognitive processes (cognitive psychophysiology), the emotional-need sphere of a person and functional states.
The subject of age-related psychophysiology is the ontogenetic changes in the physiological bases of human mental activity.
Differential psychophysiology is a section that studies the natural-scientific foundations and prerequisites of individual differences in the psyche and behavior of a person.
Imagine the brain of a living person: it looks like a small oval body with an uneven surface, consisting of a supple gelatin-like substance. How does this body (the average weight of which is 1500 g) produce thoughts and feelings, control the subtle movements of the artist's hand? How do the processes arising in it are associated with world culture: philosophy and religion, poetry and prose, kindness and hatred? In what way does this greyish-white jelly-like mass constantly accumulate ideas and knowledge, forcing the body to perform actions of varying complexity - from simply raising a hand to the virtuoso movements of a gymnast or a surgeon?
In these questions, in an extremely pointed metaphoric form, one can express the essence of the main problem of psychophysiology - problems of the relationship between the brain and the psyche, mental and physiological.
History of problems and solutions. The problem of correlation of mind and brain, body and soul, their breeding according to different levels of being, has deep historical traditions and, above all, traditions of European thinking, significantly different from many Eastern worldview systems.
In the European tradition, the terms "soul" and "body" were first considered from scientific positions by the outstanding philosopher and doctor Rene Descartes, who lived in the seventeenth century. According to Descartes, the body is an automaton acting according to the laws of mechanics, and only in the presence of external stimuli. It was Descartes who proposed the idea of a reflex as a machine-like response behavioral act (although the term "reflex" itself was proposed a century later). The soul, on the contrary, is a special entity (substance), consisting of unextended phenomena of consciousness - “thoughts”. It is thought that represents the most accessible object of self-observation. Hence the famous statement: "I think, therefore, I exist."
So, Descartes considered the soul and body as two separate, independent substances. However, as the soul can influence the activity of the body, so the body, in turn, is able to communicate information about the external world to the soul. To explain this interaction, Descartes suggested that in the human brain there is a special organ - the pineal gland - an intermediary between the soul and the body. The impact of the external world is first transmitted by the nervous system, and then in one way or another, "someone" (homunculus) deciphers the information contained in the nervous activity.
Thus, Descartes, clearly dividing the human body and soul, for the first time posed the problem of their relationship and gave the first version of its solution, called psychophysical and / or psychophysiological parallelism. Descartes' teaching, which proceeds in the explanation of reality from the presence of two opposing principles, the material and the spiritual, was called the Descartes dualism.
Many contemporaries and followers of Descartes, for example, the eminent philosopher and mathematician Leibniz, held similar views. According to his ideas, the soul and the body act independently and automatically by virtue of their internal structure, but act surprisingly harmoniously and harmoniously, like a pair of precise clocks, always showing the same time.
Psychophysical problem. As the well-known Russian historian of psychology M.G. Yaroshevsky (1996), Descartes, Leibniz and other philosophers analyzed mainly the psychophysical problem. When solving a psychophysical problem, it was about the inclusion of the soul (consciousness, thinking) in the general mechanics of the universe, its connection with God. In other words, for the philosophers who solved this problem, the place of the psychic (consciousness, thinking) in the integral picture of the world was important. Thus, the psychophysical problem, connecting the individual consciousness with the general context of its existence, has, above all, a philosophical character.
The psychophysiological problem is to solve the question of the relationship between mental and nervous processes in a particular organism (body). In this formulation, it constitutes the main content of the subject of psychophysiology. The first solution to this problem can be described as psycho-physiological parallelism. Its essence lies in the opposition of independently existing mind and brain (body and soul). In accordance with this approach, the psyche and the brain are recognized as independent phenomena, unrelated to cause and effect relationships.
The evolution of ideas about reflection. Высказанная Декартом идея о рефлекторном принципе организации простейших поведенческих актов нашла свое плодотворное развитие в дальнейших исследованиях, в том числе направленных на преодоление психофизиологического параллелизма. Большую роль в этом сыграл выдающийся физиолог И.М. Сеченов. Он обосновал возможность распространения принципа рефлекса как детерминистического принципа организации поведения на всю работу головного мозга. Сеченов утверждал, что психические акты носят такой же строго закономерный и детерминированный характер, как и акты, считающиеся чисто нервными.
Он ввел представление об иерархии рефлексов, доказав, что наряду с элементарными имеется множество сложных рефлексов. Это рефлексы с усеченным и задержанным концом, при которых происходит актуализация прошлого опыта.
Мысль, по Сеченову — это психический рефлекс с задержанным окончанием, развивающийся по внутренней цепи ассоциированных рефлексов, а психический рефлекс с усиленным окончанием — это аффект, или эмоция. Он ввел также представление о психическом элементе — интегральной части рефлекторного процесса, благодаря которому организм может активно приспосабливаться к среде.
Рассматривая психическое чувствование как неотъемлемый элемент внутренней структуры рефлекса, Сеченов прочно связал понятие психического с рефлексом, обосновал невозможность отрыва психического от рефлекторной деятельности.
Как пишет М.Г. Ярошевский (1996. С. 163): "Новая сравнительно с созданной Декартом, сеченовская модель рефлекса, воплотившая, взамен стиля механики, биологический стиль мышления, открывала перспективы построения новой системы знаний об отношениях между организмом и средой. Именно эта система получила имя поведение".
В дальнейшем, в работах И.П. Павлова и его школы исследования рефлекторных основ поведения получили глубокое теоретико-экспериментальное развитие. Проблемы этого круга детально рассмотрены в учебниках Л.Г. Воронина, А.С. Батуева, Н.Н. Даниловой и А.Л. Крыловой и др.
Несмотря на многие достижения психофизиологии, особенно в последние десятилетия, психофизиологический параллелизм как система взглядов не отошел в прошлое. Известно, что выдающиеся физиологи ХХ в. Шерингтон, Эдриан, Пенфилд, Экклс придерживались дуалистического решения психофизиологической проблемы. Согласно их мнению, при изучении нервной деятельности не надо принимать во внимание психические явления, а мозг можно рассматривать как механизм, деятельность определенных частей которого в крайнем случае параллельна разным формам психической деятельности. Целью психофизиологического исследования, согласно их мнению, должно являться выявление закономерностей параллельности протекания психических и физиологических процессов.
Взаимосвязь психики и мозга. Многочисленные клинические и экспериментальные данные, накопленные в науке в последние десятилетия, свидетельствуют, однако, что между психикой и мозгом существует тесная и диалектическая взаимосвязь. Воздействуя на мозг, можно изменить и даже уничтожить дух (самосознание) человека, стереть личность, превратив человека в зомби. Сделать это можно химически, используя психоделические вещества (в том числе наркотики), "электрически" (с помощью вживленных электродов); анатомически, прооперировав мозг. В настоящее время с помощью электрических или химических манипуляций с определенными участками головного мозга человека изменяют состояния сознания, вызывая различные ощущения, галлюцинации и эмоции.
Все вышесказанное неопровержимо доказывает прямое подчинение психики внешним физико-химическим воздействиям. Более того, в последнее время все больше и больше накапливается данных о том, что психологические состояния человека тесно связаны с наличием или отсутствием того или иного химического вещества в мозге.
On the other hand, everything that deeply affects the psyche is also reflected in the brain and in the whole organism. It is known that grief or severe depression can lead to bodily (psychosomatic) diseases. Hypnosis can cause a variety of somatic disorders and vice versa, promote healing. Widely known are the amazing experiments that yoga does with their bodies. Moreover, such a psycho-cultural phenomenon as a violation of “taboo” or witchcraft in primitive peoples can cause death even in a healthy person. There is evidence that religious miracles (appearances of the Mother of God, Holy Icons, etc.) contributed to the healing of patients with various symptoms. It is interesting in this connection that the placebo effect, i.e. the effect of a neutral substance, which is used instead of "cutting-edge" medicine,effective for one third of patients, regardless of their social status, cultural level, religion or nationality.
В целом приведенные выше факты однозначно свидетельствуют о том, что столь тесную взаимосвязь между мозгом и психикой нельзя объяснить с позиций физиологического параллелизма. Важно, однако, подчеркнуть и другое. Отношение психики к мозгу нельзя понимать как отношение продукта к производителю, следствия к причине, поскольку продукт (психика) может и часто очень эффективно воздействует на своего производителя — на мозг. Таким образом, между психикой и мозгом, психическим и физиологическим, по-видимому, существует диалектическая, причинно-следственная связь, еще не получившая полного объяснения.
Исследователи не оставляют попыток проникнуть в суть проблемы, предлагая иногда в высшей степени необычные варианты решения. Например, такие выдающиеся физиологи как Экллс и Барт считают, что мозг не "продуцирует дух", но "обнаруживает его". Получаемая органами чувств информация, "материализуется" в химические субстанции и изменения в состоянии нейронов, которые физически накапливают символические значения чувственных ощущений. Так происходит взаимодействие внешней материальной реальности с духовным субстратом мозга. При этом, однако, возникают новые вопросы: что является "носителем" духа вне мозга, с помощью каких именно рецепторов воспринимается организмом человека внешний "дух" и т.д.
Наряду с такими "экстравагантными" решениями, новые подходы к изучению соотношения физиологического и психологического прорабатываются и в контексте отечественной науки.
Ни одно из приведенных решений не получило общего признания, и работа в этом направлении продолжается. Наиболее существенные изменения в логике анализа проблемы "мозг — психика" повлекло за собой внедрение в психофизиологию системного подхода.
In the 50s. Twentieth century. началось интенсивное развитие общей теории систем и распространение системного подхода. Системность выступала, прежде всего, как объяснительный принцип научного мышления, требующий от исследователя изучать явления в их зависимости от внутренне связанного целого, которое они образуют, приобретая благодаря этому присущие целому новые свойства (Ярошевский, 1996).
Системный подход как методологический инструмент не был "изобретен" философами. Он направлял исследовательскую практику реально прежде, чем был теоретически осмыслен. Как подчеркивает М.Г. Ярошевский, сами естествоиспытатели выделяли его в качестве одного из рабочих принципов. Например, выдающийся американский физиолог У. Кеннон, открывший принцип гомеостаза, рассматривал его как синоним принципа системности.
Проникновение системного подхода в физиологию ВНД и психологию радикально изменило логику научных исследований. В первую очередь, это сказалось на изучении физиологических основ поведения.
В русле системного подхода поведение рассматривается как целостный, определенным образом организованный процесс, направленный, во-первых, на адаптацию организма к среде и на активное ее преобразование, во-вторых. Приспособительный поведенческий акт, связанный с изменениями внутренних процессов, всегда носит целенаправленный характер, обеспечивающий организму нормальную жизнедеятельность. В настоящее время в качестве методологической основы психофизиологического описания поведения используется теория функциональной системы П.К. Анохина.
Эта теория была разработана при изучении механизмов компенсации нарушенных функций организма. Как было показано П.К. Анохиным, компенсация мобилизует значительное число различных физиологических компонентов — центральных и периферических образований, функционально объединенных между собой для получения полезного приспособительного эффекта, необходимого живому организму в данный конкретный момент времени. Такое широкое функциональное объединение различно локализованных структур и процессов для получения конечного приспособительного результата было названо "функциональной системой".
 |
| Принципиальная схема центральной архитектуры функциональной системы П.К. Анохина |
Функциональная система (ФС) — это организация активности элементов различной анатомической принадлежности, имеющая характер ВЗАИМОСОДЕЙСТВИЯ, которое направлено на достижение полезного приспособительного результата. ФС рассматривается как единица интегративной деятельности организма.
Результат деятельности и его оценка занимают центральное место в ФС. Достичь результата — значит изменить соотношение между организмом и средой в полезном для организма направлении.
The composition of the functional system is not determined by the spatial proximity of the structures or their anatomical affiliation. FS can include both close and distantly located systems of the body. It can involve separate parts of any anatomically complete systems and even the details of individual whole organs. At the same time, a separate nerve cell, a muscle, a part of an organ, the whole organ as a whole can participate with their activity in achieving a useful adaptive result only if they are included in the corresponding functional system. The factor determining the selectivity of these compounds is the biological and physiological architecture of the FS itself, and the final adaptive result is a criterion for the effectiveness of these associations.
As for any living organism, the number of possible behavioral situations is unlimited in principle, therefore, the same nerve cell, muscle, part of an organ or the organ itself can be part of several functional systems in which they will perform different functions.
Thus, when studying the interaction of the organism with the environment, the unit of analysis is a holistic, dynamically organized functional system.
Types and difficulty levels of FS. Functional systems have different specialization. Some exercise breathing, others are responsible for movement, others for nutrition, etc. FS can belong to different hierarchical levels and be of varying degrees of complexity: some of them are peculiar to all individuals of this species (and even other species), for example, a functional sucking system. Others are individual, i.e. they are formed in vivo in the process of mastering experience and form the basis of learning.
Functional systems differ in the degree of plasticity, i.e. on the ability to change its components. For example, respiratory FS consists mainly of stable (inborn) structures and therefore has little plasticity: the same central and peripheral components, as a rule, participate in the act of respiration. At the same time, the FS, which provides body movement, is plastic and can easily rearrange component interconnections (something can be reached, reached, jumped, crawled).
Afferent synthesis. The initial stage of a behavioral act of any degree of complexity, and, consequently, the beginning of the work of the FS, is afferent synthesis. The importance of afferent synthesis is that this stage determines all the subsequent behavior of the organism. The task of this stage is to collect the necessary information about the various parameters of the external environment. Thanks to afferent synthesis, the body selects the main out of a variety of external and internal stimuli and creates a goal of behavior. Since the choice of such information is influenced by both the purpose of the behavior and the previous experience of vital activity, afferent synthesis is always individual. At this stage, the interaction of three components occurs: motivational arousal, situational afferentation (ie, information about the environment) and traces of past experience extracted from memory. As a result of processing and synthesis of these components, a decision is made about what to do and a transition is taking place to the formation of an action program that ensures the selection and subsequent implementation of one action from among the many potentially possible ones. The team, represented by a complex of efferent excitations, is sent to the peripheral executive organs and is embodied in the appropriate action.
An important feature of the FS is its individual and changing requirements for afferentation. It is the quantity and quality of afferent impulses that characterizes the degree of complexity, arbitrariness, or automation of a functional system.
Acceptor of action results. A necessary part of the FS is the action outcome acceptor - the central apparatus for evaluating the results and parameters of an action that has not yet taken place. Thus, even before the implementation of any behavioral act, a living organism already has an idea about it, a peculiar model or image of the expected result. In the process of real action from the "acceptor" go efferent signals to the nervous and motor structures, ensuring the achievement of the necessary goal. The success or failure of a behavioral act is signaled by efferent impulses entering the brain from all receptors that record the successive stages of a specific action (reverse afferentation). Assessment of the behavioral act as a whole, and in detail is impossible without such accurate information about the results of each of the actions. This mechanism is absolutely necessary for the success of the implementation of each behavioral act. Moreover, any organism immediately died if such a mechanism did not exist.
Each FS has the ability to self-regulation, which is inherent in it as a whole. With a possible defect in the FS, there is a rapid restructuring of its components, so that the desired result, even if less efficiently (both in time and in energy costs), would still be achieved.
The value of the theory of FS for psychology. Since its first steps, the theory of functional systems has been recognized by natural science-oriented psychology. In the most convex form, the significance of the new stage in the development of domestic physiology was formulated by A.R. Luria (1978).
Thus, P.K. Anokhin came close to analyzing the physiological decision-making mechanisms, which became one of the most important concepts of modern psychology. The theory of FS presents a sample of the rejection of the tendency to reduce the most complex forms of mental activity to isolated elementary physiological processes and an attempt to create a new theory of the physiological bases of active forms of mental activity.
However, it should be emphasized that, despite the continuing importance of the theory of FS, there are many controversial issues relating to the scope of its application. Thus, it was repeatedly noted that the universal theory of functional systems needs to be specified with reference to psychology and requires more substantive development when studying the human psyche and behavior. Very substantial steps were taken in this direction by V. B. Shvyrkovy (1978, 1989), V.D. Shadrikov (1994, 1997), V.M. Rusalov (1989). Nevertheless, it would be premature to assert that the theory of FS has become the main research paradigm in psychophysiology. Moreover, there are stable psychological constructs and phenomena that do not receive the necessary justification in the context of the theory of functional systems. This, first of all, is about the problem of consciousness, the psycho-physiological aspects of which are currently being developed very productively (see topic 11).
The ratio of the concepts of "individual", "organism", "personality", "individuality" is traditionally among the most controversial issues of psychology. The introduction of a systematic approach has allowed a new approach to solving this problem, highlighting the notion of individuality and its structure. The main ideas and provisions in this direction were formulated in the works of V.S. Merlin, B.F. Lomov, K.K. Platonov, I.V. Ravich-Scherbo, V.M. Rusalov.
Personality structure. A systematic approach to the problem of individuality of a person dictates the need to consider it as a system of its features both as an individual, and as an organism, and as an individual, i.e. as a "hierarchical system of systemic qualities."
From these positions, a person’s individuality appears as a multilevel hierarchical system in which a different number of levels is distinguished. For example, K.K. Platonov proposes to allocate the following organic levels: somato-morphological, biochemical, physiological individuality. In the psychological sphere, he distinguishes a procedural mental individuality, to a certain extent common in man and animals, and a substantial mental individuality, which is the product of his interaction with the world. The third mental level is a socio-psychological individuality, peculiar only to man.
In the most general form, the problem of the relationship between an individual, personality, and individuality was developed by V.S. Merlin According to him, the concepts of "individual" (organism) and "personality" are included in the more generalized concept of "individuality", which is considered as a hierarchically ordered system of properties at all stages of development.
Vs Merlin formulated a number of principles for studying integral individuality:
The principle of consistency. Individual properties should not be considered on their own, but depending on the integral individuality.
The principle of hierarchy , i.e. the lower levels cause the higher and themselves change depending on them.
The principle of removal , i.e. the laws of the lower levels are modified depending on the connection with the higher ones. Moreover, when entering into communication with the highest levels of the phenomenon of the lower, they acquire a new systemic quality.
Vs Merlin described in detail the specifics of a systematic approach to the study of integral individuality. He paid special attention to the principle of determinism, emphasizing that causal, causal determination is not enough to explain the functioning of a large system that includes levels: biochemical, nervous system, temperament, personality, meta-individuality (personal statuses).
Different approaches to the structure of individuality lead to the selection of different, often quite fractional levels and sublevels. The subject of particular detail is the area between the physiological and psychological levels. For example, it is widely accepted (albeit with some terminological differences) the separation of psychodynamic and psychosocial levels.
It is logical to assume that the dynamic characteristics, i.e. the formal parameters of behavior, to a greater degree, should depend on the peculiarities of the functioning of the nerve substrate and, accordingly, in the hierarchy of individuality should occupy a subordinate place in relation to the psycho-content level. Along with psychodynamic, another level appears in the literature - neurodynamic. His separation from the psychodynamic is based on the idea of the existence of a special category of nervous processes that are not directly related to the provision of mental. However, the criteria for the separation of these categories of nerve processes can not always be used in the evaluation of empirical methods, which are used for differentiated diagnostics of these levels as independent. The consequence of this is a certain voluntarism in the distribution of methods by levels, which can lead to false conclusions.
To avoid this, in our opinion, it is possible, highlighting as an independent psycho-physiological and psychological levels. In this case, the neurodynamic and psychodynamic levels are actually included in the psycho-physiological, but the scope of manifestations of the latter is wider, since this level characterizes not only the formal-dynamic processes of the brain and psyche, but also the qualitative originality of their flow.
Inter-level communication. The levels described above in the structure of individuality exist in close interaction with each other. According to V.S. Merlin, between the levels there are not only one-one-valued, but many-valued connections, when each characteristic of one level is associated with many characteristics of another and vice versa. B.F. Lomov emphasizes the notion of communication to the fore, proposing to consider individuality as "a system of multidimensional and multi-level relations covering all sets of conditions and stable factors of the individual development of an individual." And this is natural, since the concept of communication is key to system research. It is assumed that the systematicity of the object is most fully revealed through its connections and their typology.
The study of inter-level relations in the structure of individuality is associated with a number of problems, and among them, first of all, the determination of their orientation and the establishment of cause-effect relationships. One of the widely used research techniques in psychophysiology is to establish links by calculating correlations between physiological characteristics (for example, parameters of an encephalogram) and psychological (for example, mental development indicators). In this case, as a rule, they talk about the search for "correlates" of mental functions and processes at the level of the bioelectrical activity of the brain. Studies of this type are so common that VB Shvyrkov singled them out in a special direction, calling it "correlative" psychophysiology.
The search for correlates in most cases can be regarded as a kind of psycho-physiological "pilotage": the results of such studies, as a rule, outline the area for a more in-depth search. The bottom line is that the presence of a correlation does not provide a basis for establishing a cause-effect relationship. For example, the presence of a significant correlation coefficient between the indicator of intelligence and the EEG parameter does not answer the question of how such a relationship arises: whether intelligence determines the character of an encephalogram, or vice versa. Для ответа на подобный вопрос требуются иные приемы и способы анализа.
Методологически это решается путем анализа способов организации уровней. Большинство исследователей считают, что уровни в структуре индивидуальности организованы иерархически.
Понятие иерархии предусматривает расположение частей или элементов целого в порядке от высшего к низшему. При этом предполагается, что каждый вышележащий уровень наделен особыми полномочиями по отношению к нижележащим. Применительно к человеческой индивидуальности такое понимание иерархии требует установления отношений доминирования — подчинения и выделения управляющих и управляемых уровней. По этой логике психологический уровень, будучи вышележащим, выступает как управляющий по отношению к процессам, происходящим на нижележащих психофизиологическом, физиологическом и других уровнях. Следовательно, в приведенном выше примере именно интеллект должен определять параметры энцефалограммы.
Однако возможен и другой альтернативный принцип взаимодействия уровней — гетерархия, в соответствии с которым ни за одним из уровней не зафиксирована постоянная роль ведущего и допускается коалиционное объединение высших и низших уровней в единую систему действия. При этом считается возможным совместное или поочередное управление процессами, происходящими в живой системе на том или ином этапе ее жизнедеятельности. Применительно к индивидуальности человека это означает, что физиологический и психологический (а также все другие) уровни действуют в тесной взаимосвязи, определяя текущее состояние системы.
Значение системной модели индивидуальности. Несмотря на видимую абстрактность изложенных представлений, они имеют реальное значение для теоретического обоснования психофизиологических исследований и интерпретации результатов. Выше были изложены современные представления о
продолжение следует...
Часть 1 1. SUBJECT AND TASKS OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY
Часть 2 Glossary - 1. SUBJECT AND TASKS OF PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY
Comments
To leave a comment
Psychophysiology
Terms: Psychophysiology