In the early decades of the twelfth century, Psychologische Forschung was primarily an outlet for researchers from the school of Gestalt psychology. Otto Selz, whose views were closer to those adopted in the cognitive/information-processing revolution in psychology that began in the 1950s, never published in Psychologische Forschung. However, his work was the subject of a negative evaluation in the journal in a book review by Wilhelm Benary, which was followed by critical assessments published elsewhere by Selz and Karl Bühler of a chapter of Kurt Koffka’s. A lengthy rebuttal from Koffka then appeared in Psychologische Forschung. In the present paper, we describe Selz’s system and Benary’s assessment of it. We then explain the relevant aspects of Koffka’s book chapter (in: Dessoir M (ed) Die Philosophie in ihren Einzelgebieten. Ullstein, Berlin, 1925) and the strong critiques of it by Bühler and Selz in 1926, followed by details of Koffka’s (Psychol Forsch 9:163–183, 1927) response. This part of the history of psychology is of significance to contemporary psychology on several levels. We have embedded this episode against the historical backdrop of Selz’s life and tragic end.

在 12 世纪初期，Psychologische Forschung主要是格式塔心理学派研究人员的一个发泄渠道。奥托·塞尔兹 (Otto Selz) 的观点更接近于 1950 年代开始的心理学认知/信息处理革命中所采用的观点，他从未在Psychologische Forschung 上发表过文章。然而，他的作品在威廉·贝纳里 (Wilhelm Benary) 的一篇书评中受到期刊的负面评价，随后塞尔兹 (Selz) 和卡尔·比勒 (Karl Bühler) 在其他地方发表了对库尔特·考夫卡 (Kurt Koffka) 的一章的批评性评价。Koffka 的长篇反驳随后出现在Psychologische Forschung. 在本文中，我们描述了 Selz 的系统和 Benary 对它的评估。然后我们解释了 Koffka 的书章节的相关方面（在：Dessoir M (ed) Die Philosophie in ihren Einzelgebieten。Ullstein，Berlin，1925 年）以及 Bühler 和 Selz 在 1926 年对它的强烈批评，接着是 Koffka 的（Psychol）的细节Forsch 9:163–183, 1927) 回应。这部分心理学史对当代心理学有几个层面的意义。我们将这一集嵌入到塞尔兹一生和悲惨结局的历史背景中。