Reductionism Vs Holism

"In reductionism, the reference is to the classical Newtonian assumption that the dynamics of any complex system can be understood from studying the properties of its parts. Complex systems are therefore broken down into their components and each piece is studied individually by way of disciplinary and sub-disciplinary approaches."

"In holism, the whole is more than or different from the sum of its parts. Consequently, breaking complex systems down into their individual components by the method of reductionism is only a first approximation of the truth"

- Willy Ă˜streng (Professor, Norwegian University of Science and Technology)[1]

Reductionism is the study of a larger phenomenon's parts, taking the assumption that from exhaustive study of the parts the whole can be understood, like studying a car's wheels, engine, electrical system etc to understand the whole car perfectly. This can be seen in studies like Baron- Cohen et al. where a smaller area (ie: empathy) is studied to try and gain an understanding of a wider phenomenon, (ie: autism). This will often use scientific methods, as smaller components can be studied in settings with higher controls (validity) and standardised methods (reliability). The most reductionist studies will often be so reductionist in order for them to be tested in the most highly scientific and objective manner (it is possible to perform a near- perferct study on the effect of different verbs in leading questions, whilst performing a similarly controled study on the whole of memory and all its aspects would be impossible due to the number of components).

Highly Reductionist areas:

  • The Cognitive Approach - often reductionist as it seeks to examine individual thought processes.
  • The Physiological Approach - likiewise as it examines only biological root causes.

Holism is the opposite: it often sacrifices scientific objectivity in favour of a wider understanding. It is often used in more humanistic studies, such as Rogers's and Maslow's theories (they can be found in the educational psychology section of the textbook). For example, Maslow's Hierachy of Needs is far less objective and scientific: he looks at 48 people who he thought to have fulfilled their potential (ie: Einstein, Freud and Roosevelt) and used his knowledge as a psychotherapist to identify their characteristics. Next he formulated a staged theory, looking at things he believed they needed to realise their inborn potential (a potential he believes is universal and individual). The Hierarchy of Needs was based on assumptions, but they are high in face validity and predictive validity (Kleinman et al. 1998 provide evidence for children needing plentiful food before they can start realising their academic potential.
<!CONSIDER REVISING>

More Holistic areas:

  • Developmental approach sometimes, as it will try and create integrated theories (note: this refers to Rogers, Maslow, and to some extent Piaget (he creates an integrated theory of various processes though he only looks at staged development). It does NOT refer to Freud who looks only looks at the effects of innate drives/ conflicts).
Table of strengths and weaknesses Reductionism Holism
Validity Generally higher construct validity (better methodology). Higher controls, more validity in what can be proven as true, though less can proven. Specific predictions made, high predictive validity. Generally high in face validity, though low in construct validity. Usually some predictive validity, as predictions can be made from the more grandiose theories. Can be higher in ecological validity, as based off real life experience.
Reliability High in standardisation generally, high external reliability (good replicability). Use of large samples and care taken not to be ethnocenteric, or to over generalise. Generally low in reliability as no standardised method to creating holistic theories.
Usefulness cell-content cell-content
Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License