Дэвид Маркс: Теория гомеостаза и исследования в психологии.

British psychologist

David Francis Marks (born 1945) is a psychologist, author and editor of numerous articles and books largely concerned with five areas of psychological research – judgement, health psychology, consciousness, parapsychology and intelligence. Marks is also the originator of the General Theory of Behaviour, and has curated exhibitions and books about artists and their works.

Marks was born 12 February 1945 in Liphook, Hampshire, England to Victor W. F. Marks and Mary Dorothy (née Goodman) Marks. explain that Marks' homeostasis theory attributes the obesity imbalance to a “Circle of Discontent”, a system of feedback loops linking weight gain, body dissatisfaction, negative affect, and overconsumption. These authors state that the theory is consistent with an extensive evidence base. Annunziato and Grossman (2016) indicate that the homeostasis theory focuses on five feedback loops that form an insidious and vicious "Circle of Discontent". If for any reason high levels of dissatisfaction, negative affect, consumption, or increased body weight should arise, then interactivity through feedback loops a vicious circle is created, a disturbance to the stability of the system that controls weight gain. When it becomes activated, the system drifts away from equilibrium toward a dysfunctional state of non control. The authors explain that Marks (2015) proposes a four armed strategy to halt the obesity epidemic consists of (1) putting a stop to victim blaming, stigma, and discrimination; (2) devalorizing the thin ideal; (3) reducing consumption of energy dense, low nutrient foods, and drinks; and (4) improving access to plant based diets. Annunziato and Grossman (2016) concluded: "If fully implemented, interventions designed to restore homeostasis have the potential to halt the obesity epidemic". The Homeostasis Theory of Obesity was further elaborated in his 2016 book, Obesity. Comfort vs. Discontent (Marks, 2016). The book's dedication states: "To the two point one billion people who are overweight or living with obesity. Please take note. It is not your fault. You are not to blame. You are the victims. Be informed, be empowered, and, above all else, resist. This book is for you." (Marks, 2016). Marks further elaborated the theory of Psychological Homeostasis in a General Theory of Behaviour, which he published as a book in 2018.

Marks' research into consciousness and mental imagery led to the development of the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire, a tool for the assessment of individual differences in visual imagery. Marks (1973) reported that high vividness scores correlate with the accuracy of recall of coloured photographs. In 1995 he published a new version of the VVIQ, the VVIQ2. This questionnaire consists of twice the number of items and reverses the rating scale so that higher scores reflect higher vividness. The VVIQ has been validated in about 2000 studies using perceptual and cognitive tasks. Rodway, Gillies and Schepman (2006) found that high vividness participants were significantly more accurate at detecting salient changes to pictures compared to low vividness participants, replicating an earlier study by Gur and Hilgard (1975). Recently Cui et al. (2007) found that reported image vividness correlates with increased activity in the visual cortex. This study shows that the subjective experience of forming a mental image is reflected by increased visual cortical activity. Logie, Pernet, Buonocore and Della Sala (2011) used behavioural and fMRI data for mental rotation from individuals reporting vivid and poor imagery on the VVIQ. Groups differed in brain activation patterns suggesting that the groups performed the same tasks in different ways. These findings help to explain the lack of association previously reported between VVIQ scores and mental rotation performance. Lee, Kravitz and Baker (2012) used fMRI and multi voxel pattern analysis to investigate the specificity, distribution, and similarity of information for individual seen and imagined objects. Participants either viewed or imagined individual named object images on which they had been trained prior to the scan. Correlation between fMRI and VVIQ scores showed that, in both object selective and early visual cortex, Lee et al. 's (2012) measure of discrimination across imagery and perception correlated with the vividness of imagery.

In 2010, David Marks systematically analysed the association between literacy skills and intelligence quotient(IQ) across time, nationality, and race. Marks (2010) published a sceptical theory of IQ score variations explaining both the Flynn effect and the alleged racial variations in IQ as an artefact (error) stemming from uncontrolled literacy differences. Marks (2010) hypothesized that IQ differences across time, race and nationality are all caused by differences in literacy because intelligence test performance requires literacy skills not present in all people to the same extent. In eight different analyses mean full scale IQ and literacy scores yielded correlations ranging from .79 to .99. Kaufmann (2010) explained the significance of Marks' study as follows. If increasing literacy were really explaining a number of seemingly different IQ trends, then you would expect to see a few different phenomena. First, within a population you should expect increased education of literacy skills to be associated with an increase in the average IQ of that population. Second, IQ gains should be most pronounced in the lower half of the IQ bell curve since this is the section of the population that prior to the education would have obtained relatively lower scores due to their inability to comprehend the intelligence test's instructions. With increased literacy, you should expect to see a change in the skewness of the IQ distribution from positive to negative as a result of higher rates of literacy in the lower half of the IQ distribution (but very little change in the top half of the distribution). You should also expect to see differences on the particular intelligence test subscales, with increased literacy showing the strongest effects on verbal tests of intelligence and minimal differences on other tests of intelligence. If all these predictions hold up, there would be support for the notion that secular IQ gains and race differences are not different phenomena but have a common origin in literacy. Kaufman described how Marks tested these predictions by looking at samples representative of whole populations (rather than individuals), and used ecological methods to compute statistical associations between IQ and literacy rates across different countries. Kaufman's (2010) review suggested that Marks' findings were completely consistent with the predictions: (i) The higher the literacy rate of a population, the higher that population's mean IQ, and the higher that population's mean IQ, the higher the literacy rate of that population. (ii) When literacy rates declined, mean IQ also declined, a reversed Flynn Effect. (iii) Unequal improvements occurred across the entire IQ spectrum with the greatest increases in the lower half of the IQ distribution. Kaufman pointed out that the evidence suggested that both the Flynn Effect and racial/national IQ differences showed the largest effects of literacy on verbal tests of intelligence, with the perceptual tests of intelligence showing no consistent pattern. The alleged association between race and intelligence and also the Flynn effect both have a similar explanation: literacy differences across race and across time are, Marks believes, the cause of both. Racial IQ differences are converging as the literacy skills within two populations become more equal. Thus racial differences have an environmental cause, just like the Flynn effect. Essentially, both the Flynn effect and racial differences in measured IQ are artefacts of literacy differences. As the literacy of Western populations declines, as appears to be the case currently, then Marks' literacy theory of IQ scores predicts that average IQ test scores is expected to decline, and the Flynn effect will go into reverse, which is exactly what recent studies have found.

All sciences are founded on general theories: Biology has the theory of evolution; Physics, the theory of relativity; Chemistry, the theory of molecular quantum mechanics; and Geology, the theory of plate tectonics. Psychology has no general theory. In his 2018 monograph, 'A General Theory of Behaviour' (GTB), David Marks (2018) attempts to fill that gap with a central theory covering all areas of the discipline. Many psychological theories are species specific, situation specific, or sub area specific so cannot be general theories. 'A General Theory of Behaviour' applies to all sub areas, situations, species, ages, stages, genders, and cultures. The only proviso for the GTB is that the organism must have consciousness. The theory consists of 20 principles and 80 propositions, in total, 100 empirically falsifiable propositions. These 100 propositions make the GTB transparent and capable of falsification. In embracing intentionality, purpose and desire, the GTB is non reductive while, at the same time, drawing upon principles from other sciences, in particular, Biology and Physiology. Following Claude Bernard, Walter B. Cannon and others, David Marks advocates the usefulness of the concept of 'Psychological Homeostasis' and explains the implications for the Science of Behaviour. The GTB asserts that organisms are not adapted to each other and the environment because natural selection made them that way, but they are made that way owing to an inbuilt striving towards stability and equilibrium. The GTB has the potential to advance understanding of human nature and to integrate the discipline of Psychology. The next steps involve rigorous testing of the principles and hypotheses of the General Theory.