The big picture: Writing psychology into the history of the human sciences

The grand narratives which once gave order and readability to histories, of science and of the human sciences are widely rejected in current historiography, and historians focus on detailed studies of scientific knowledge and activity in particular contexts. How, then, are synthetic general histories, accessible to the non-specialist, to be written? This paper, designed as an open-ended discussion, reflects on the business of writing about psychology in a general history of the human sciences. It considers three large topics: reflexivity, and the situation in the human sciences where “man” is both subject and object; the boundary-less identity of the human sciences and hence the need to express values in delimiting the content of the field; and the long-standing debate about what sort of “science” is appropriate for knowledge of human beings. The conclusion turns to “the quest” as a narrative form. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Understanding in the social sciences and history

Understanding in its widest sense is the aim of all rational knowledge. A distinction can be made between interpretation (leading to the understanding of meanings) and explanation (leading to the understanding of facts). The view that in the social sciences facts and meanings are the same is criticized. In respect of the specific understanding of human and social facts empathetic and rational understanding are distinguished and some of the difficulties pointed out inherent in both, in particular with regard to testability. On the other hand, it is found that a purely behaviouristic approach, although possible, would not be completely satisfactory, so that in spite of all difficulties the social sciences (history included) cannot do without specific understanding, as a heuristic device as well as an aim.     

Understanding and using the history of social psychology

Authors in this collection offer both critique and contextualist counterpoint to the standard, "official" histories of the field-successive editions of the Handbook of Social Psychology in 1954, 1968, 1985, and 1998. Unlike mainstream histories, the collected studies do not together constitute a seamless chronicle of continual progress for practitioners in a research area seeking social science status, viability, and legitimacy. Rather the authors focus on choice points, crises, and debates (some still ongoing), pay special heed to non-mainstream branches and voices, question numerous assumptions concerning the interrelationships among social psychological methodology, ontology (Danziger; MacMartin & Winston; Stam, Radtke, & Lubek), boundaries (Good), and individualisms (moral, political, and/or methodological). The specific contributions of Floyd and Gordon Allport are discussed from several perspectives as they helped define and shape and write the history of the field (Lubek & Apfelbaum; Parkovnick; Greenwood; Chung), and bridge it to neighboring areas (personality) and disciplines (psychology and sociology) (Nicholson; Barenbaum; Cherry). The constraints, origin myths, insensitivities, and omissions of standard histories are pointed out (Samelson), some partial correctives are advanced, and a more generative role for future historical studies is suggested.     

When social psychology became less social: Prasad and the history of rumor research

Rumor research, in general, and its delayed incorporation of the work of rumor researcher Jamuna Prasad, in particular, exemplify how the intellectual climate of American social psychology discouraged the development of social approaches. In the present paper, we explain his conceptualization of how rumors start and spread, and explore findings from subsequent research supporting or negating his propositions. It is our contention that, although Prasad had identified the basic variables involved in rumor generation and transmission correctly, mainstream social psychological research in the 1940s did not incorporate his contributions. Instead, mirroring the Zeitgeist of American social psychology, rumor research was approached from a predominantly individual level of analysis. In the present paper, the authors have tried to resurrect some of the group-level variables from Prasad's treatment of rumor and to suggest that social psychology adopt a more 'social' approach to rumor.     

Making social psychology experimental: a conceptual history, 1920-1970

The historical emergence of a field devoted to the experimental investigation of effects identified as "social" required a radical break with traditional conceptions of the social. Psychological experimentation was limited to the investigation of effects that were proximal, local, short-term, and decomposable. A viable accommodation to these constraints occurred in the closely related programs of Moede's experimental crowd psychology and Floyd Allport's experimental social psychology. Later, Kurt Lewin attempted to provide a different conceptual foundation for the field by drawing on certain precepts of Gestalt psychology and the philosophy of scientific experimentation developed by Ernst Cassirer. These ideas were poorly understood and were soon replaced by a methodological regime in which a new generation of statistical procedures and experimental design shaped implicit conceptions of the social in social psychological experiments through such procedures as randomization and the additive combination of variables.     

Historical relations of psychology as an object-science and a subject-science: toward psychology as a human science

Textbooks and other teaching of psychology's history oversimplify to the point of presenting it as the evolution of an exclusively object-science--despite general familiarity with integral extrascientistic practices and assumptions. Representative examples are presented, along with an overview of object-psychology's cultural/practical routes to dominance. The purpose of highlighting these facets of psychology's development is to call for psychology to take explicit account of humans' subjecthood as well as objectness, on the way rereading our history toward an integrated science.     

Contributions to the history of psychology: CXVII. Who's who in American psychology: a citation study of introductory psychology textbooks

The author indexes of 15 introductory psychology textbooks were surveyed to identify the authorities cited most frequently. The five names cited most often in descending order were Freud, Bandura, Skinner, Piaget, and James. Differences from earlier comparable citation studies are discussed.     

Life satisfaction in old age: linking social psychology and history

A life course perspective on aging assumes that adaptation is governed by factors beyond the immediate situation. Using longitudinal data on 79 women from the 1900 generation of the Berkeley Guidance Study, we examined how social and psychological factors interact over time in the course of successful aging, as expressed by life satisfaction. The consequences of adaptive resources in early adulthood vary in relation to social class. Intellectual skills in 1930 indirectly predict life satisfaction in old age for women from the working class, whereas emotional health is more influential in the life satisfaction of women with higher class origins. Social activity in old age makes a difference only in the lives of women from the working class. Finally, adaptation to old age is related to women's experiences with past stressful events. Middle-class women in 1930 showed gains attributable to Depression hardship (1930s), whereas the life satisfaction of women from the working class was diminished by such hardships. Several mechanisms are discussed that may link widely separated problem situations and life events across the life course. The analysis provides empirical support for the proposition that the influence of social change on life trajectories is contingent on what individuals bring to change situations.     

Excess disability and malignant social psychology: A case study of Alzheimer's disease

An in-depth case study was undertaken to assess the effects of what Kitwood has termed ‘malignant social psychology’ on the observed behaviour of an Alzheimer's disease sufferer. Interviews were conducted with the spouse and observations were made in an adult day-care centre, where staff members were also interviewed. Abilities that the spouse reported to be absent at home were readily observed at the day-care centre, lending support to Brody's idea of excess disability, i.e. disability not due to disease alone. Furthermore, forms of malignant social psychology existed in the home environment but did not exist in the day-care centre. Excess disability and its absence coincided with the presence and absence of aspects of malignant social psychology. The sufferer's behaviour was found to be affected not only by the extant neuropathology, but also by social relationships.