<p>Dynamical systems models is commonly used in the domain of perception and action. See <a href="http://www.cog.brown.edu/research/ven_lab/Publications/Warren_P&amp;A_PR06.pdf" rel="nofollow">Warren, 2006</a> for a comprehensive review. This work uses the mathematical formalism of dynamics and not just the metaphorical concepts. An exploration of the references of Warren's paper, as well as of papers that have cited it, will find many examples of dynamical models of perception and action.</p>

<p>For another example of dynamical modeling in perception-action research (with moves toward more "cognitive" models as well), I recommend <a href="http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0262611317" rel="nofollow">Scott Kelos' Book <em>Dynamic Patterns</em></a>. This is an accessible overview (10 years before Warren's paper) that makes very explicit the connection between the metaphors and actual models.</p>

<p>I will also add that there are close theoretical and methodological links between Warren, Thelen/Smith, and Kelso that go beyond merely the use of dynamical systems models. For example, they all draw links between dynamical systems methods and the possibility of a non-representational ontology of mind.</p>

<p>All that said, even within perception-action, there are many researchers who use the metaphorical concepts of dynamical systems theory inexactly. A chapter of my Ph.D. thesis will be on incorrect use of the terms "attractor" and "bifurcation", etc., in the literature. (playing fast and loose with fixed points vs. nullclines, state variables vs. parameters, etc.)</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-01-01T17:49:29.407Z
It's actually excellent form to answer old questions! Welcome to CogSci.SE!
Seanny123
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-01-01T17:23:25.747Z
2016-01-01T17:49:47.823Z
2016-01-01T17:49:47.823Z
ontologist
<p>Like all models and modeling frameworks, the utility of the approach is often tied to how much it increases our understanding of the phenomena of interest. As summarized nicely by <a href="http://www.indiana.edu/~cogdev/labwork/dynamicsystem.pdf">Smith &amp; Thelen (2003)</a>, there are developmental questions that are better conceptualized through the framework of DST than through alternative modeling frameworks due to the richly interactive and multi-causal structure of the phenomena.</p>

<p>You'll also find that applications of DST in Developmental Psychology are not just appealing to the metaphorical use of DST. There are rigorous mathematical uses of the tools of DST to explain developmental phenomena. One of the most cited examples is <a href="http://cogs.indiana.edu/~cogdev/labwork/DynamicsEmbodiment.pdf">Thelen et al. (2001)</a>, who modeled the A-not-B error. There is <a href="http://www.uiowa.edu/~icdls/dft/dft-publications.html">a lot of similarly inspired modeling work</a> being done throughout the field.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-05T13:48:46.433Z
I didn't know about the actual mathematical uses of DST in developmental psychology. I am glad to hear about them, because I often get the impression that metaphorical imports of concepts used in the natural sciences, intend to impress rather than actually provide a useful framework. I guess I was wrong this time.
Lazaros Mitskopoulos
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-04T17:03:05.713Z
2014-11-04T17:03:05.713Z
Josh
<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamical_systems_theory#In_human_development" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Dynamical systems theory</a> as it is used in the context of developmental psychology, and by some psychoanalysts <a href="http://www.psybc.com/pdfs/library/Seligman_Metaframework.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">as in this article</a> or <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbRbm2niWK8" rel="nofollow noreferrer">in this video by the first speaker</a> can be described as an attempt to introduce mathematical concepts in the study of psychological phenomena. Unlike <a href="https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/288/what-are-good-examples-of-applying-dynamical-systems-in-cognitive-science/290#290">other applications</a> of dynamical systems theory, the above seem to use terms like "attractor" in an abstract or metaphorical sense, that is, outside of a formal mathematical context.</p>

<ul>
<li>Is this kind of application useful or just a bunch of preety words, stripped of their real meaning ?</li>
<li>Do we have a better understanding of psychological phenomena through such a framework?</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-03T18:49:10.907Z
This seems like a very broad question likely to elicit opinions more than factual answers, and as such seems off-topic to me.  It could be rewritten a bit to ask for instances of applying these theories or something more specific to avoid that, I think, if it would answer your need.
Krysta
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-03T19:16:06.223Z
Thanks for pointing that out. I 'll think a bit about which section would be better to focus on and then I will edit it to a more precise question.
Lazaros Mitskopoulos
CC BY-SA 3.0
2014-11-04T02:43:28.350Z
I'm worried that your question is too broad and subjective. To further improve the question, you could modify it in a reference-request and perhaps narrow it down to a specific mathematical theory and how it applies to a specific domain of psychology.
Seanny123
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-07-05T07:59:23.637Z
Quite related: [Does neurodynamics have any relation to psychodynamics?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/19745/12937)
Ooker
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-09-29T10:21:53.757Z
related work: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1099257/full
Dadep
<reference-request><developmental-psychology><psychology>
Dynamical systems theory as a metaphor in psychology: is it useful or not?
Lazaros Mitskopoulos
# Dynamical systems theory as a metaphor in psychology: is it useful or not?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2014-11-03)

[Dynamical systems theory](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamical_systems_theory#In_human_development) as it is used in the context of developmental psychology, and by some psychoanalysts [as in this article](http://www.psybc.com/pdfs/library/Seligman_Metaframework.pdf) or [in this video by the first speaker](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbRbm2niWK8) can be described as an attempt to introduce mathematical concepts in the study of psychological phenomena. Unlike [other applications](https://cogsci.stackexchange.com/questions/288/what-are-good-examples-of-applying-dynamical-systems-in-cognitive-science/290#290) of dynamical systems theory, the above seem to use terms like "attractor" in an abstract or metaphorical sense, that is, outside of a formal mathematical context.

* Is this kind of application useful or just a bunch of preety words, stripped of their real meaning ?
* Do we have a better understanding of psychological phenomena through such a framework?

**Tags:** reference-request, developmental-psychology, psychology

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: This seems like a very broad question likely to elicit opinions more than factual answers, and as such seems off-topic to me.  It could be rewritten a bit to ask for instances of applying these theories or something more specific to avoid that, I think, if it would answer your need.  
> **username_0**: Thanks for pointing that out. I 'll think a bit about which section would be better to focus on and then I will edit it to a more precise question.  
> **username_2**: I'm worried that your question is too broad and subjective. To further improve the question, you could modify it in a reference-request and perhaps narrow it down to a specific mathematical theory and how it applies to a specific domain of psychology.  
> **username_3**: Quite related: [Does neurodynamics have any relation to psychodynamics?](https://psychology.stackexchange.com/q/19745/12937)  
> **username_4**: related work: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1099257/full  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_6 on 2014-11-04. Score: 7 | Accepted answer

Like all models and modeling frameworks, the utility of the approach is often tied to how much it increases our understanding of the phenomena of interest. As summarized nicely by [Smith & Thelen (2003)](http://www.indiana.edu/~cogdev/labwork/dynamicsystem.pdf), there are developmental questions that are better conceptualized through the framework of DST than through alternative modeling frameworks due to the richly interactive and multi-causal structure of the phenomena.

You'll also find that applications of DST in Developmental Psychology are not just appealing to the metaphorical use of DST. There are rigorous mathematical uses of the tools of DST to explain developmental phenomena. One of the most cited examples is [Thelen et al. (2001)](http://cogs.indiana.edu/~cogdev/labwork/DynamicsEmbodiment.pdf), who modeled the A-not-B error. There is [a lot of similarly inspired modeling work](http://www.uiowa.edu/~icdls/dft/dft-publications.html) being done throughout the field.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I didn't know about the actual mathematical uses of DST in developmental psychology. I am glad to hear about them, because I often get the impression that metaphorical imports of concepts used in the natural sciences, intend to impress rather than actually provide a useful framework. I guess I was wrong this time.  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2016-01-01. Score: 4

Dynamical systems models is commonly used in the domain of perception and action. See [Warren, 2006](http://www.cog.brown.edu/research/ven_lab/Publications/Warren_P&A_PR06.pdf) for a comprehensive review. This work uses the mathematical formalism of dynamics and not just the metaphorical concepts. An exploration of the references of Warren's paper, as well as of papers that have cited it, will find many examples of dynamical models of perception and action.

For another example of dynamical modeling in perception-action research (with moves toward more "cognitive" models as well), I recommend [Scott Kelos' Book *Dynamic Patterns*](http://rads.stackoverflow.com/amzn/click/0262611317). This is an accessible overview (10 years before Warren's paper) that makes very explicit the connection between the metaphors and actual models.

I will also add that there are close theoretical and methodological links between Warren, Thelen/Smith, and Kelso that go beyond merely the use of dynamical systems models. For example, they all draw links between dynamical systems methods and the possibility of a non-representational ontology of mind.

All that said, even within perception-action, there are many researchers who use the metaphorical concepts of dynamical systems theory inexactly. A chapter of my Ph.D. thesis will be on incorrect use of the terms "attractor" and "bifurcation", etc., in the literature. (playing fast and loose with fixed points vs. nullclines, state variables vs. parameters, etc.)

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: It's actually excellent form to answer old questions! Welcome to CogSci.SE!  

---

