Historical spaces of social psychology (original) (raw)
Related papers
Histories, historiographies, and traces of some forgotten social psychologies
This article, which is set in the historical-critical tradition, is divided into three parts. The first part deals with the different possible ways of making history, both in general terms – with a marked attention to Nietzsche and Foucault’s points of view analysed in relation to the traditional ones – and in the psychological field. The second part refers to some fundamental elements of the historiographical debate concerning social psychology, with a particular emphasis on the disputes arisen from Gordon Allport’s historical chapter on the background of modern social psychology which was published in 1954 in Lindzey’s Handbook of Social Psychology. The third part draws on the results of a survey aimed at exploring the role played by some key issues, provided by Allport’s chapter, in the international scientific communication conveyed by the ‘Psychological literature’ from 1887 to 1954. Some ‘founding myths’ of the discipline are brought into question by the analysis of the survey’s main results: in particular, the myth supporting the idea of an Anglophone and entirely individuocentric social psychology, or that of an entirely sociocentric European tradition, and that of social psychology’s limited applicative disposition
Historical Genesis of Social Psychology as a Source of Shaping Ideas about its Semantic Scope, Discipline Structure and Scientific Status // Наукові студії із соціальної та політичної психології. Спецвипуск. - К. : Міленіум, 2015.
The article is an attempt of a critical analysis of the current state of social psychology as a branch of science from the point of its past, in other words – based on the reconstruction of its historiogenesis. Having done this reconstruction, the author confutes a myth aboutemergence of social psychology within two sciences – sociology and psychology, which results in social psychology being viewed as a “hybrid” subdiscipline with a vague scientific status. The idea is presented consistently that social psychology is a psychological science and could not have been any other, for it is aimed at studying a special class of psychological (not some other) phenomena. Thus, all the precedents of incorporating social psychology into other sciences must be viewed as the special forms of interaction (connections) of psychology with these sciences. The author clarifies the place of social psychology in a psychological knowledge system showing that social psychology broadens themeta-subject field of psychology in general up to its actual ontological scope, and therefore, it is one of the most important fundamental psychological disciplines.
207 Social Psychology As History or Science: An Addendum
The present paper attempts to reassess the "social psychology as science or history" debate instigated by Gergen (1973). It is argued that although Gergen is correct in asserting the transhistorical variability of social psychological phenomena, the implication is that social contextual variables should be incorporated into our theoretical framework, rather than that we should engage in an historical endeavor.
History of Psychology and Social Practice: Introduction to the Special Issue (2007)
The origins of this special issue lie in another project that was completed last year, an edited book titled, Internationalizing the history of psychology . As a historian of psychology with a special interest in global issues, particularly relating to what are sometimes called 'developing' countries, I have always thought that history of psychology has not paid sufficient attention to countries outside of North-Western Europe and North America. The aim of the volume was to try to some restore some balance in this regard and the editor of this journal, Aydan Gulerce contributed a chapter on the history of psychology in Turkey to that book .
Estudios de Psicologia, 32(2), 243-255., 2011
This article examines the paradoxical place occupied by Kurt Lewin in the history of social psychology. By analysing an exhaustive corpus of all French-language social psychology textbooks published between 1946 and 2000, we attempt to bring to light both the frequency of references to the author and the rhetoric employed to present his scientific contribution. Our results reveal a paradox underlying the way in which this eminent social psychologist is referred to. While the importance of his role in the formation of this discipline is emphatically reinforced, the full extent of his relevance is not accounted for. This paradox thus takes the form of a marginalisation, which is manifested in a tendency to concentrate on only a portion of his publications, in the stereotyped presentation of his experiments, and in the insufficient context provided for his studies.
Journal of The History of The Behavioral Sciences, 2008
In historical treatments of social psychology, 1908 is typically cited as the year in which the discipline originated. This is because of the publication of the textbooks by psychologist William McDougall and sociologist Edward Alsworth Ross, the first to be exclusively devoted to social psychology. Yet, as Gustav Jahoda convincingly demonstrates, there is a rich history of social psychological thought that can be traced back to the eighteenth-century Enlightenment. Jahoda provides a very readable and concise account of how the modern ideas of twentieth-century social psychology were anticipated and, in some cases, directly influenced by eighteenth-and nineteenth-century thinkers. His intent is not to produce an authoritative history, but rather to paint a broad picture of how social psychology is rooted in the past. He, therefore, appropriately concludes his historical analysis with the 1930s, a period in which the content and methods of social psychology are well established and the competing disciplinary claims by psychology and sociology are essentially resolved. Jahoda, however, also points to links between past ideas and later developments in the field. These include Fritz Heider's theoretical writing and such current alternatives to mainstream experimental social psychology as critical social psychology, evolutionary social psychology, and social neuropsychology.
Bridging History and Social Psychology: What, How and Why (uncorrected proof)
This special issue aims to bridge history and social psychology by bringing together historians and social psychologists in an exercise of reading and learning from each other’s work. This interdisciplinary exercise is not only timely but of great importance for both disciplines. Social psychologists can benefit from engaging with historical sources by being able to contextualise their findings and enrich their theoretical models. It is not only that all social and psychological phenomena have a history but this history is very much part of present-day and future developments. On the other hand historians can enhance their analysis of historical sources by drawing upon the conceptual tools developed in social psychology. They can “test” these tools and contribute to their validation and enrichment from completely different perspectives. Most important, as contributions to this special issue amply demonstrate, psychology’s “historical turn” has the potential to shed a new light on striking, yet underexplored, similarities between contemporary public spheres and their pre-modern counterparts. This issue thereby calls into question the dichotomy between traditional and de-traditionalized societies—a distinction that lies at the heart of many social psychology accounts of the world we live in. The present editorial will introduce and consider this act of bridging history and social psychology by focusing on three main questions: What is the bridge made of? How can the two disciplines be bridged? and Why we cross this interdisciplinary bridge? In the end a reflection on the future of this collaboration will be offered.