Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Psychobiology, sex research and chimpanzees: philanthropic foundation support for the behavioral sciences at Yale University, 1923—41.Kersten Jacobson Biehn - 2008 - History of the Human Sciences 21 (2):21-43.
    Behavioral science research in American universities was promoted and influenced by philanthropic foundations. In the 1920s and 1930s, Rockefeller philanthropies in particular financed behavioral science research projects that promised to fulfill their mandates to `improve mankind', mandates that foundation officers transformed into an informal, loosely defined human engineering effort. Controlling behavior, especially sexual and social `dysfunction', was a major priority. The behavioral scientists at Yale University, led by president James R. Angell and `psychobiologist' Robert M. Yerkes, tapped into foundation largesse (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Development of Sociobiology in Relation to Animal Behavior Studies, 1946–1975.Clement Levallois - 2018 - Journal of the History of Biology 51 (3):419-444.
    This paper aims at bridging a gap between the history of American animal behavior studies and the history of sociobiology. In the post-war period, ecology, comparative psychology and ethology were all investigating animal societies, using different approaches ranging from fieldwork to laboratory studies. We argue that this disunity in “practices of place” explains the attempts of dialogue between those three fields and early calls for unity through “sociobiology” by J. Paul Scott. In turn, tensions between the naturalist tradition and the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Analysis and/or Interpretation in Neurophysiology? A Transatlantic Discussion Between F. J. J. Buytendijk and K. S. Lashley, 1929–1932. [REVIEW]Julia Gruevska - 2022 - Journal of the History of Biology 55 (2):321-347.
    In the interwar period, biologists employed a diverse set of holistic approaches that were connected to different research methodologies. Against this background, this article explores attempts in the 1920s and 1930s to negotiate quantitative and qualitative methods in the field of neurophysiology. It focuses on the work of two scientists on different sides of the Atlantic: the Dutch animal psychologist and physiologist Frederik J.J. Buytendijk and the American neuropsychologist Karl S. Lashley, specifically analyzing their critical correspondence, 1929–1932, on the problems (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations