心理学危机的实质与解决方案

人们曾在不同层面上讨论心理学的危机,而这种对危机认识的偏离本身又进一步加强了学科本身的分裂。在总结前人对危机认识的基础上,通过分析表明,心理学危机是心理学学科发展中自我同一性危机的表现,其实质在于心理学学科同一性的缺乏,而根源来自于心理学建立之初的理论基础。因此,心理学危机的解决有待于其学科同一性的确立,心理学学科的发展则有待于其学科同一性的展开。     

Thinking Outside the Disciplinary Box: a Reply to the Comments

This article is a reply to the comments on my target article, “Presentism and diversity in the history of psychology” (Brock Psychological Studies, 60, 2015a). The most controversial aspect of the article by far was my views on what it is appropriate to call, “psychology” and what it is not. Having established that psychology has its origins in Europe, I refer to the efforts of psychologists from outside the Western world to construct an “indigenous psychology”. I conclude by discussing the view of Staeuble (2006) that the disciplinary order of the social sciences is “Eurocentric” in that it reflects the assumptions of the culture in which it was produced. As long as psychologists outside the Western world continue to unquestioningly adopt a disciplinary order that reflects its cultural origins in the West, and even insist on projecting it backwards onto their own intellectual traditions, the process of indigenisation will be incomplete.     

Community Psychology at the Crossroads: Prospects for Interdisciplinary Research

Effective engagement in interdisciplinary work is critical if community psychology is to achieve its promise as a field of ecological inquiry and social action. The purpose of this paper and special issue is to help make the benefits of interdisciplinary community research clearer and to identify and begin to address its challenges. Although some areas of psychology (e.g., biological, cognitive and health) have made substantial interdisciplinary strides in recent decades, progress in community psychology (and related areas) is more modest. In this article we explore the prospects for expanding and improving interdisciplinary community research. Challenges include designs, measures, and analytical frameworks that integrate multiple levels of analysis from individuals through families, organizations, and communities to policy jurisdictions, and the complexities involved in simultaneously bringing together multiple disciplinary collaborators and community partners. Challenges to interdisciplinary collaboration common to all disciplines include the disciplinary nature of academic culture and reward structures, limited funding for interdisciplinary work and uncertainties related to professional identity and marketability. Overcoming these challenges requires a synergy among facilitative factors at the levels of the interdisciplinary project team (e.g., the framing question; embedded relationships; leadership), the investigators (e.g., commitment to new learning; time to invest), and the external context (e.g., physical, administrative, economic and intellectual resources and support for interdisciplinary work). We conclude by identifying several exemplars of effective interdisciplinary collaborations and concrete steps our field can take to enhance our development as a vibrant community-based, multilevel discipline increasingly devoted to interdisciplinary inquiry and action.     

The historiography of Swedish sociology and the bounding of disciplinary identity

Bounding a scientific discipline is a way of regulating its cognitive direction as well as its relations to neighboring disciplines and extra-academic authorities. In this process of identity making, disciplinary history often is a crucial element. In this article, focusing on the historiography of Swedish sociology and the reception of Gustaf Steffen, Sweden's first professional sociologist, it is argued that Steffen's marginalized role in the traditional accounts should be understood not only with reference to his supposed theoretical shortcomings, but also in the historical context of the early postwar reestablishment of sociology as an academic discipline and its prevalent need for a new disciplinary identity, strategically adjusted to the contemporary institutional and political settings.     

The sociocultural movement in psychology,the role of theories in sociocultural inquiries,and the theory of sociocultural models

This special issue presents the theory of sociocultural models (TSCM) and its applications in diverse areas of psychology, including education, health care, clinical practice, gender relations, and general research. As many theories already exist in the social sciences, some readers may ask: “Why do cross‐cultural, cultural, and indigenous psychologists need another theory?” This question is comprised of two aspects: culture/cultural and theory/theoretical. Therefore, to answer it, it is important to clarify both issues. The first relates to cultural and its relation to psychological. The second, theory, considers its relation to cultural and psychological. These issues have long‐range implications for all culture and psychology disciplines as they pose many questions: What role does culture play in the mental functioning of people? How is culture constituted? Is cultural related to social? Does people’s mental functioning exert reciprocal influences on their cultural and social functioning? While working toward answering these questions, researchers quickly determine that more questions arise: What role should theories play in answering these questions? What constitutes theory in culture and psychology disciplines? How should such a theory (or such theories) address the triad of cultural, social, and mental? Consequently, in an effort to provide an overview of the TSCM and to begin to answer these questions, this introduction consists of two parts. The first part addresses the sociocultural turn in modern psychology; this part discusses its implications for research in culture and psychology disciplines. The second segment examines the topic of the theoretical backgrounds of cultural and cross‐cultural research and connects the philosophical paradigms of interpretivism and realism with the theory of sociocultural models. This introduction concludes with a brief overview of the articles included in this issue.     

Becoming Conscious of the American Middle Class (Un)consciousness

It is argued in this article that social psychology would make the greatest contribution to research on class identity if it concentrated on the area closest to psychology—analysis of class consciousness. In order to show that the study of the psyche and mentality of the middle class is one of the least researched aspects of the American middle class, a brief overview of the different approaches to the study of the middle class in selected disciplines will be offered. It will be demonstrated that even if the identity of the U.S. middle class cannot be fully understood without its history and the social context in which it operates, it is the study of its (un)consciousness that social psychology should be focusing its research efforts on. The alternative would make social psychology indistinguishable from social history or sociology.     

Clinical behavior analysis and clinical social work: A mutually reinforcing relationship

Clinical behavior analysis (CBA) and clinical social work (CSW) have the potential to gain much from one another. The existing synergistic relation between the fields, however, is largely under-recognized, overwhelmed by the stronger disciplinary and historical associations among behavior analysis and psychology and education. This paper reviews the similarities and differences between CBA and CSW, how they have enriched each other, and the potential for greatly expanded relations between the two fields.     

建立心理学学科门类及学位类别的分析与展望

摘 要 为了促进中国本土化心理学体系建设和心理学学科的整体发展,从中国与发达国家心理学学科管理制度的比较中发现中国心理学学科归属所存在的问题,并在反思中探讨形成问题的原因。通过心理学在现有学科归属中的局限性,心理学成为独立学科门类的可能性,心理学成为独立学科门类后学科新体系的系统性,心理学成为独立学科门类的社会性四个方面的分析与讨论,研究了使心理学成为独立学科门类与学位类别的必要性与可行性。特别是从建设和谐社会的角度对心理学的学科归属、心理学的未来发展、现代社会发展及心理学与其它学科的广泛联系等需要的讨论中,指出中国心理学在专业设置方面隶属于理学和教育学的不足之处,认为这种隶属关系将会制约心理学的发展和学科成熟。提出应该在现有学位体系中增加心理学学科门类与学位类别,使心理学作为一个与理学和教育学并列的独立学科门类。通过改进学位体系让心理学在更大的学科背景中,建设中国本土心理学自身体系,使心理学研究方法更加多样化,为产生众多边缘学科和更好地发挥社会应用功能创造条件,也为今后心理学发展带来许多发展机遇,并在此基础上为展望心理学未来发展提供新的视角。     

The nature of psychology: the great dilemmas

Research about the nature of psychology, its subject matter, its level of analysis, its scientific laws, its relationship with other disciplines, and its social relevance has been a matter of great concern and interest during the development of psychology. This problem can be analyzed in terms of the dilemmas of the psychological discipline, which have been choice points, crossroads, alternative decisions that bring psychologists face to face with the following issues: (a) the subject matter of psychology: psyche, mind, or behavior?; (b) the role of scientific methodology: is psychology a natural science, a social/behavioral/human science, or a part of the humanities?; (c) the universality or particularity of scientific laws in psychology: are laws universal or culture-bound and contextual?; and (d) the balance between science and profession: is psychology a basic science, a socially relevant profession, or both?     

The psychology of privacy in the digital age

Privacy is a psychological topic suffering from historical neglect—a neglect that is increasingly consequential in an era of social media connectedness, mass surveillance, and the permanence of our electronic footprint. Despite fundamental changes in the privacy landscape, social and personality psychology journals remain largely unrepresented in debates on the future of privacy. By contrast, in disciplines like computer science and media and communication studies, engaging directly with sociotechnical developments, interest in privacy has grown considerably. In our review of this interdisciplinary literature, we suggest four domains of interest to psychologists. These are as follows: sensitivity to individual differences in privacy disposition, a claim that privacy is fundamentally based in social interactions, a claim that privacy is inherently contextual, and a suggestion that privacy is as much about psychological groups as it is about individuals. Moreover, we propose a framework to enable progression to more integrative models of the psychology of privacy in the digital age and in particular suggest that a group and social relations–based approach to privacy is needed.     

Placing Community Psychology in the Context of the Social, Health and Educational Sciences: Directions for Interdisciplinary Research and Action

Building on Maton, Perkins and Saegert’s framework on inter-disciplinary work related to community psychology, this article addresses two questions about community psychology in the context of the social, health and educational sciences: (1) What can community psychology learn from other disciplines? and (2) What can community psychology uniquely contribute to other disciplines?     

Standards of Scientific Conduct: Disciplinary Differences

Teaching of responsible conduct of research is largely predicated on the assumption that there are accepted standards of conduct that can be taught. However there is little evidence of consensus in the scientific community about such standards, at least for the practices of authorship, collaboration, and data management. To assess whether such differences in standards are based on disciplinary differences, a survey, described previously, addressing standards, practices, and perceptions about teaching and learning was distributed in November 2010 to US faculty from 50 graduate programs for the biomedical disciplines of microbiology, neuroscience, nursing, and psychology. Despite evidence of statistically significant differences across the four disciplines, actual differences were quite small. Stricter measures of effect size indicated practically significant disciplinary differences for fewer than 10 % of the questions. This suggests that the variation in individual standards of practice within each discipline is at least as great as variation due to differences among disciplines. Therefore, the need for discipline-specific training may not be as important as sometimes thought.     

Reinventing the University Through the Teaching of Diversity

University reform encompasses an increased emphasis on the social and emotional development of students. In particular, the development of caring, empathy, and community are emphasized. This team of psychology professors approaches the task of university reform by presenting both its philosophy of diversity inclusion and specific inclusion strategies as means of promoting enhanced development of our students. Although the discipline of psychology is used as an example, the philosophical argument and the strategic approaches may be applied to other disciplines.     

The family of fundamental social categories includes kinship: evidence from the memory confusion paradigm

Kinship is a fundamental component of human sociality influencing a range of behaviors including altruism, aggression, and mating. Though a central focus in psychology's neighboring disciplines, kinship has been largely neglected within psychology. An illustrative example – and the focus here – is research on social categorization. Researchers investigating the categories into which our mind carves the social world have focused primarily on sex, age, and race. Here we present evidence that kinship belongs in the family of fundamental social categories. In a series of experiments using a memory confusion paradigm, we show that participants implicitly encode the kinship relations of social targets and do so to the same extent as sex and age, two previously established robust dimensions of social categorization. The functional framework applied here provides useful guide‐rails for investigating how the human mind naturally parses the social world, and, more broadly, helps unite psychology with its neighboring disciplines in which kinship is treated as an important conceptual tool. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The comrade on the crossroads of scholarship and struggle: Troubling the exile of Frantz Fanon from social and political psychology

This article traces the presence and absence of Frantz Fanon in the field of social and political psychology. Our work is guided by an assemblage of methods— a critical analysis of mainstream scholarship, a collective interrogation with a transnational gathering of colleagues and friends, and a deep reading of Fanon's texts on struggle, internalized oppression, violence and a new humanism. Through this, our paper is a call for radical disciplinary reflection on why Fanon has been ruthlessly exiled from social/political psychology, the potential his writings hold for courses, scholarship, and struggle, and how we might more boldly theorize, as he did, from within the fire of struggles for justice and liberation.     

Dire straits: the divisive legacy of the 1898 Cambridge anthropological expedition.

Bartlett's claim that the Cambridge anthropological expedition of 1898 to the Torres Strait "put a social and ethnological stamp upon Cambridge psychology" does not bear close examination. Rivers pursued his interests in both anthropology and psychology but came to regard them as largely independent pursuits. Myers, through the influence of Rivers, came to identify himself primarily as a psychologist. McDougall was very quickly marginalized. There were two occasions when the promise of the Torres Strait began to be fulfilled: first, the reunion of Rivers, Myers, McDougall, and Seligman, all medically trained, at Maghull Hospital to help in the treatment of shell-shocked soldiers; second, Bartlett's attempt, early in his career, to establish a sociocultural psychology. However, the remarkable "academy" at Maghull was disbanded at the end of the war, and Bartlett, in his attempt to promote the "upstart subject" of psychology at Cambridge, increasingly came to distance his department from social and ethnological concerns. There is a neglected legacy of the Torres Strait expedition, the curious belief that the methods of experimental psychology, and indeed psychophysics, could (somehow) be foundational to the human sciences. This legacy has served both to suggest that psychology must have something to do with anthropology, while perpetually deferring any actual integration between the two disciplines.     

Social psychology circa 2016: A field on steroids

This paper considers the current state of the field in social psychology. On the one hand, we have made enormous progress in integrating our research with other disciplines, reaching out to general public and using our knowledge toward addressing major societal ills. On the other hand, social psychology has been recently mired in a crisis of confidence concerning the appropriateness of our methods and the robustness of our findings. We propose that shifting our attention to theory, method, and application, as well as away from a pervasive “outcome focus,” can extricate social psychology from its current doldrums and allow it to realize its potential as an indispensable social science.     

心理学研究中的还原主义问题考察

还原主义是主导心理学研究的非常重要的理论原则。其核心思想是认为,世界是分层的梯级系统,可以通过已知的、低层级的事物或理论来解释与说明未知的、高层级的事物或理论。实证的科学心理学在自己的起步的阶段,曾经把物理学当成了自己的榜样,当成了自己的标准。心理学在解说人的心理行为的过程中,就把心理行为的规律归结为物理主义的规律。生物决定论观点认为人的心理或行为主要受人的生物因素所决定,人类的社会行为、人格乃至社会生活的基本方面都决定于这些个体、群体、种族或人种的生物因素。还原论与还原方法既有联系又存在着质的差别。还原论在心理学的研究中有其合理的地方。这也就可以区分出所谓的物理主义的还原,化学分析的还原、生物决定的还原、生理机制的还原、社会决定的还原、文化制约的还原,等等。在表面上看,心理学研究中的还原主义是一种简单化的或简约化的研究处理。但是,在深层上看,心理学研究却借助于还原论而形成了自己的研究框架。并且,这也是将各自不同学科的相关的探索转换成为了心理学的学术性资源。     

More Than Words: Place,Discourse and the Struggle over Public Space in Barcelona

The social construction of human-environment relations is a central concern of an emerging tradition of research on place, which extends the so-called “discursive turn” in social psychology. This research highlights the primary role of everyday linguistic practices in the production of place meanings, challenging the prevailing tendency among environmental psychologists to treat place meanings mainly as an expression of individual cognitions. By the same token, in this article we argue that research on human-environment relations also has the potential to enrich the field of discursive psychology, tempting discursive researchers to move beyond their customary focus on verbal and written texts. Specifically, we propose an analytic framework that transcends the dualism between the material and discursive dimensions of human-environment relations. In order to develop this argument, we outline the novel concept of place-assemblage and illustrate its utility by conducting an analysis of a recent conflict over a public space in Barcelona. This analysis shows how discursive constructions of the development of this public space over time were inextricably entwined with other kinds of material and embodied practices—practices through which place meanings were actively performed, reproduced and contested.     

Psychology's own mindfulness: Ellen Langer and the social politics of scientific interest in “active noticing”

Ellen Langer's mindfulness construct is presented as “indigenous” to disciplinary psychology. Langer's early work laid the foundations for the research program she would come to call the psychology of possibility. Studying inattentive behavior (mindlessness) and intentionally reflective cognition (mindfulness) placed her work directly in line with the theoretical priorities of the 1970s and influenced the direction of research in several subdisciplines related to social cognition. Positioning Langer's work at an intersection crossed by various discourse communities in psychology explains much of its influence within the discipline. However, its relevance is additionally related to a broader field of research and application also employing the terminology of mindfulness. While superficially synonymous, the majority of mindfulness research is distinguished from Langer's due to differences in origination, definition, and goals. Comparative assessments are used as a lens through which to interrogate the social politics of mindfulness theories’ burgeoning success over the past half century.