perm filename CHAP7[4,KMC]20 blob
sn#086943 filedate 1974-02-12 generic text, type T, neo UTF8
00100 EVALUATION
00200
00300 The primary aim in constructing this model was to explore,
00400 clarify, develop, test and improve -all with a model- a theory having
00500 explanatory value. To satisfy this aim, the model must meet norms of
00600 internal consistency (systemicity) and norms of external
00700 correspondence with observation (testability). A secondary aim would
00800 involve pragmatic norms of application. These aims are not unrelated
00900 but the primary one is more fundamental since useful applications
01000 require some degree of consistency and correspondence to observation.
01100 As emphasized in Chapter 2, a model in the form of an
01200 algorithm consists of a structure of functions or procedures whose
01300 inner workings are sufficient to reproduce the outward symbolic
01400 behavior under consideration. The theory embodied in the model is
01500 revealed in the set of statements which illuminate the connections
01600 betweeen input and output, i.e. which describe how the structure
01700 reacts under various circumstances.
01800 What constitutes a satisfactory explanation has been treated
01900 in 2.1. The "fit" or correspondence with facts of observation as
02000 indicated by measurements and empirical tests indicating the degree
02100 of faithfulness of the reproduction, were described in Chapter 6.
02200 Given that the model has met the above criteria, what does it as an
02300 artifact tell us about naturally-occurring paranoid processes?
02400 First, the model attempts to revisualize or reconceptualize
02500 the phenomena of paranoid disorders. It draws attention to factors
02600 (such as the scan for malevolence ) which might not otherwise be
02700 attended to. Paranoid disorders are not viewed as first-order
02800 "diseases" but as a mode of processing symbols secondary to a primary
02900 disturbance. The patterns of linguistic paranoid behavior observed
03000 in an interview are produced by an underlying organized structure of
03100 rules and not by a variety of random and unconnected mechanical
03200 failures. Second, the underlying structure consists of an algorithm,
03300 an organization of symbol-processing strategies or procedures. Third,
03400 the model as an analogy indicates that to change this structure, its
03500 procedures must be accessible to reprogramming in the higher-level
03600 language of the algorithm. Finally, as a conceptual reform, the model
03700 suggests that other types of psychopathologies might be viewed from a
03800 symbol-processing standpoint.
03900 Decision procedures for consensus acceptability of a model
04000 sometimes depend not so much on truth, an elusive state, as on
04100 whether a majority of the relevant expert community believes the
04200 theory or model to approximate truth to some unknown and unknowable
04300 degree and to be better than promising available alternatives, that
04400 is, to be the best we can do for the time being. A model is tenable
04500 as long as it is worth working with by improving it, extending it,
04600 devising experiments and tests to probe it, and applying it in
04700 contexts of practical action. Validation is ultimately a private
04800 experience of the individual. Empirical truth or falsity cannot be
04900 proven with certainty, but their presence can be assayed by some sort
05000 of critical assessment and deliberation. We can forgive models for
05100 being only nearly true. A theory or model may bring cognitive or
05200 pragmatic comfort, not because it is TRUE but because it is a
05300 workable and exciting possibility which represents an improvement
05400 over its contending rivals.
05500 Cognitive comfort is a type of intellectual satisfaction.
05600 Pragmatic comfort accrues from technically exploitable knowledge,i.e.
05700 applications which make things work the way humans want them to work
05800 efficiently in practical contexts of technological action. For the
05900 pragmatist, a model is a means to an end; for the theoretician, an
06000 explanatory model is an end in itself. It is hoped that this paranoid
06100 model can contribute to understanding one of the mysteries of human
06200 conduct, the paranoid mode. There remains the enigma of the paranoid
06300 "streak" which renders whole nations susceptible to ideological
06400 convictions in which Elsewhereans are believed to be malevolent
06500 oppressors.
06600 It is a truism of methodology textbooks that an infinite
06700 number of theories or models can account for the same data of
06800 observation. Without questioning whether "infinite" means
06900 indefinitely large or just more than one, we must allow for rival
07000 explanations. For a rival to be a live and tenable option, it should
07100 be truly alternative (i.e., not just a family version saying the same
07200 thing in a different way), and be confirmable or disconfirmable by
07300 tests.
07400 Prediction of new facts from a theory not only test a theory
07500 but provide useful information. Not all acceptable theories predict
07600 new facts, e.g. Copernicus'. Although I would maintain that faithful
07700 reproduction (fidelity as measured by indistinguishability along
07800 specific dimensions) is a proper and major test for the adequacy of
07900 simulation models, it would be a bonus if our model could satisfy the
08000 function of making possible new knowledge through prediction. The
08100 term "prediction" has a spectrum of meanings ranging from forecasts
08200 to prognoses to prophecies to precise point-predictions in time. To
08300 predict (and to postdict) from a theory or model is to derive and
08400 announce a fact prior to knowledge of its actual occurrence.
08500 However one needs knowledge of the kind of fact expected, the
08600 conditions which produce it and the circumstances under which it will
08700 occur. The interest in prediction may stem from a desire (1) to
08800 confirm or disconfirm a theory or model or (2) to obtain useful
08900 information about the future, as in weather forecasting. Celestial
09000 mechanics provides the ideal of accurate long-range predictions.
09100 But even astronomers, with the advantage of studying isolated and
09200 repetitive systems, have their troubles. In 1759 Halley's comet
09300 arrived four days later than predicted. In spite of our advanced
09400 20th century knowledge, a prediction made in 1962 was off by eight
09500 days, that is, twice as bad. (In fairness we must make allowances for
09600 the fact that great masses, distances and velocities are involved.
09700 Also comets defy Newton's law of gravity).
09800 Predictions of individual human behavior are severely limited
09900 by our restrictions of knowledge. For example, (1) sufficient
10000 knowledge of initial conditions may require that we know the whole
10100 past history of an individual (something not yet achieved for even a
10200 single person), (2) individuals do not remain isolated over the time
10300 stretch of the prediction; they interact with other individuals of an
10400 unknown nature, (3) since life is a fortuitous flux of chance
10500 intersections of independent causal chains, one would also have to be
10600 able to foresee events of the physical environment and its changes,
10700 (4) the process of observation needed to obtain information for
10800 predictions may have non-negligible and unforeseeable effects on the
10900 observed.
11000 In one sense our paranoid model makes moment-to-moment
11100 predictions and asserts new counterfactuals about behavior in a
11200 psychiatric interview. That is, if an interviewer says X under
11300 conditions Y, then the model's response will be characterized by
11400 z1...zn, and the same holds true for paranoid patients.
11500 Counterfactual prediction means that on the basis of observed
11600 behavior we are willing, with an inductive risk, to assume the
11700 presence of unobserved behavior potentials in a model's or patient's
11800 repertoire of capabilities.
11900 Predicting new kinds of events or properties, instead of
12000 kinds we are already familiar with, would represent a genuine bonus,
12100 indicating the model is more than ad hoc and has excess content. It
12200 would give both clinicians and investigators something to look for.
12300 This novelty could arise in two ways. First, the model might
12400 demonstrate a property of the paranoid mode hitherto unobserved
12500 clinically. In principle this could come about because the I-O
12600 behavior of the model is a consequence of a large number of
12700 interacting hypotheses and assumptions chosen initially to explain
12800 frequently observed phenomena. When the elements of such a complex
12900 conjunction interact with highly variable inputs they generate
13000 consequences in addition to those they were designed to explain.
13100 Whether any of these consequences are significant or characteristic
13200 of the paranoid mode remains a subject for future study.
13300 It is also possible that a new property of paranoia may be
13400 discovered in the clinical interview, although perhaps everything
13500 that can be said about paranoid dialogues has been said. If a new
13600 property were found, a search for it might be conducted in the
13700 model's behavior. If successful, this again would add to the model's
13800 acceptability.
13900 A second novelty might arise in the behavior of the model in
14000 some new situation. Since it is designed to simulate communicative
14100 behavior in an interview situation, the "new" circumstance would have
14200 to involve some new type of linguistic interaction to which the model
14300 is capable of responding. From its behavior one might then predict
14400 how paranoid patients would behave under similar circumstances. The
14500 requisite empirical tests and measures would show the degree of
14600 correspondence between patient and model behaviors.
14700 This possibility is of importance in considering emancipatory
14800 therapies for patients entangled in the quandaries of the paranoid
14900 mode. Since the model operates at a symbol processing level using
15000 natural language, it is this level at which linguistic and
15100 conceptual skills of clinicians can be applied. Language-based or
15200 semantic techniques do not seem very effective in the psychoses but
15300 they are useful in states of lesser severity. A wide range of new
15400 semantic techniques, including extremes, could be tried first on the
15500 model without subjecting patients to blind experimentation.
15600 While we have used the model principally to explore a theory
15700 and to study psychiatric judgements, its potential use as a training
15800 device has not escaped our reflections. Medical students and
15900 psychiatric residents need "disposable patients" to practice on
16000 without jeopardy (to either). A version of the paranoid model can
16100 display the changes in its inner states during an interview.
16200 Whether the optimal goal of interviewing (gathering relevant
16300 information without upsetting the patient) has been achieved, can
16400 thus be estimated. A beginning interviewer could practice in
16500 private or with a supervisor present. Many interviewers have reported
16600 that the model has a definite effect on them. The student can get
16700 the feel of the paranoid mode long before he interviews an actual
16800 patient. The effect of various interviewing styles might be
16900 studied and compared.
17000
17100 Although this simulation of paranoia covers a variety of
17200 phenomena, it is circumscribed in what it attempts to explain. The
17300 proffered explanation is local and restricted in that it accounts for
17400 only one type of symbol-processing mode. Past attempts at grand-
17500 scale explanations of all mental processes in all contexts have
17600 failed. A preferable strategy, successful in other sciences, is to
17700 build one circumscribed and tested theory or model at a time so that
17800 the field can gradually move forward a step at a time, each step
17900 gaining consensus before attempting the next.