<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"> <channel> <title><![CDATA[History of Psychology - Vol 27, Iss 4]]></title> <description><![CDATA[History of Psychology features refereed articles addressing all aspects of psychology's past and of its interrelationship with the many contexts within which it has emerged and has been practiced. It also publishes scholarly work in closely related areas, such as historical psychology (the history of consciousness and behavior), psychohistory, theory in psychology as it pertains to history, historiography, biography and autobiography, and the teaching of the history of psychology.]]></description> <link>https://psycnet.apa.org</link>  <generator>APA PsycNET</generator> <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Nov 2024 06:00:31 GMT</lastBuildDate> <atom:link href="https://psycnet.apa.org/journals/hop.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/> <copyright><![CDATA[Copyright 2024 American Psychological Association]]></copyright> <language><![CDATA[en-us]]></language> <item> <title><![CDATA[The totemic use of an author in psychology: A century of publications of the work of F. C. Bartlett.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[We have tried to retrace the contributions and dissemination of the work of the famous British psychologist F. C. Bartlett through various authors who have been inspired by his work, to a greater or lesser extent. To investigate these questions, we have chosen to carry out a bibliometric work. We were interested in the scientific articles available via the electronic library services (offered by the university and via Google Scholar). The only criterion that guided us in the inclusion in the corpus was the explicit nominative reference to Frederic Charles Bartlett on the whole article. The corpus collected (<em>n</em> = 731) concerns a period of almost a century (1920–2019). The results reveal two periods of increased publication, in 1985 (<em>n</em> = 20) and 2019 (<em>n</em> = 137). Nevertheless, while the name of the author is increasingly cited, most of the time it is only once in the body of the articles. A form of scientific automatism manifests itself in the form of a brief, systematic and automatic citation of the first edition of only one of his books. This “mystified” usage may well extend beyond this author, since Lewin is subject to the same stereotypical quotations and paradoxical marginalization in French-language social psychology textbooks (Pétard et al., 2001). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <link>http://doi.org/10.1037/hop0000260</link> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2024-91225-001</guid> <pubDate>Thu, 06 Jun 2024 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>The totemic use of an author in psychology: A century of publications of the work of F. C. Bartlett.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[We have tried to retrace the contributions and dissemination of the work of the famous British psychologist F. C. Bartlett through various authors who have been inspired by his work, to a greater or lesser extent. To investigate these questions, we have chosen to carry out a bibliometric work. We were interested in the scientific articles available via the electronic library services (offered by the university and via Google Scholar). The only criterion that guided us in the inclusion in the corpus was the explicit nominative reference to Frederic Charles Bartlett on the whole article. The corpus collected (<em>n</em> = 731) concerns a period of almost a century (1920–2019). The results reveal two periods of increased publication, in 1985 (<em>n</em> = 20) and 2019 (<em>n</em> = 137). Nevertheless, while the name of the author is increasingly cited, most of the time it is only once in the body of the articles. A form of scientific automatism manifests itself in the form of a brief, systematic and automatic citation of the first edition of only one of his books. This “mystified” usage may well extend beyond this author, since Lewin is subject to the same stereotypical quotations and paradoxical marginalization in French-language social psychology textbooks (Pétard et al., 2001). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/hop0000260</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>History of Psychology, Vol 27(4), Nov 2024, 297-316; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2024-91225-001">doi:10.1037/hop0000260</a></p>We have tried to retrace the contributions and dissemination of the work of the famous British psychologist F. C. Bartlett through various authors who have been inspired by his work, to a greater or lesser extent. To investigate these questions, we have chosen to carry out a bibliometric work. We were interested in the scientific articles available via the electronic library services (offered by the university and via Google Scholar). The only criterion that guided us in the inclusion in the corpus was the explicit nominative reference to Frederic Charles Bartlett on the whole article. The corpus collected (<em>n</em> = 731) concerns a period of almost a century (1920–2019). The results reveal two periods of increased publication, in 1985 (<em>n</em> = 20) and 2019 (<em>n</em> = 137). Nevertheless, while the name of the author is increasingly cited, most of the time it is only once in the body of the articles. A form of scientific automatism manifests itself in the form of a brief, systematic and automatic citation of the first edition of only one of his books. This “mystified” usage may well extend beyond this author, since Lewin is subject to the same stereotypical quotations and paradoxical marginalization in French-language social psychology textbooks (Pétard et al., 2001). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title><![CDATA[Jean Piaget and the autonomous disciples, Alina Szeminska and Bärbel Inhelder: From the “critical method” to the appropriation of research culture.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[The problems addressed in this article are the transition from the Piagetian clinical method to the so-called critical method, that is, the use of objects manipulated by both the experimenter and the child, and the study of the role of Piaget’s female collaborators––in particular Alina Szeminska and Bärbel Inhelder––in the establishment of the critical method. Several authors suggested that Inhelder was behind certain Piagetian experimental devices and the critical method. To evaluate this thesis, we used segment analysis, dealing with the isolable, relevant, and necessary parts of an experiment. Intensive research into Piaget’s research data and publications from the 1920s, compared with the early publications of Szeminska and Inhelder, showed that it was Piaget who, as early as 1922, made the transition from the clinical to the critical method and invented a number of experimental setups, including those attributed to Inhelder. On the other hand, Szeminska appeared as the creator of her experimental design. To interpret this situation, we used the concept of research culture and the focus shifted from priority issues to methodological and social practices: Piaget’s students had to appropriate his research culture, a “system of methods” in a dynamic relationship. This enabled their inclusion into his research programs by learning to create new devices and thus become autonomous disciples. Piaget adopted a strategy of generosity, making available to his students research directions that he had already dealt with, on which they specialized and which he had given priority, thus helping them in their careers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <link>http://doi.org/10.1037/hop0000261</link> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-07048-001</guid> <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jul 2024 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>Jean Piaget and the autonomous disciples, Alina Szeminska and Bärbel Inhelder: From the “critical method” to the appropriation of research culture.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[The problems addressed in this article are the transition from the Piagetian clinical method to the so-called critical method, that is, the use of objects manipulated by both the experimenter and the child, and the study of the role of Piaget’s female collaborators––in particular Alina Szeminska and Bärbel Inhelder––in the establishment of the critical method. Several authors suggested that Inhelder was behind certain Piagetian experimental devices and the critical method. To evaluate this thesis, we used segment analysis, dealing with the isolable, relevant, and necessary parts of an experiment. Intensive research into Piaget’s research data and publications from the 1920s, compared with the early publications of Szeminska and Inhelder, showed that it was Piaget who, as early as 1922, made the transition from the clinical to the critical method and invented a number of experimental setups, including those attributed to Inhelder. On the other hand, Szeminska appeared as the creator of her experimental design. To interpret this situation, we used the concept of research culture and the focus shifted from priority issues to methodological and social practices: Piaget’s students had to appropriate his research culture, a “system of methods” in a dynamic relationship. This enabled their inclusion into his research programs by learning to create new devices and thus become autonomous disciples. Piaget adopted a strategy of generosity, making available to his students research directions that he had already dealt with, on which they specialized and which he had given priority, thus helping them in their careers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/hop0000261</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>History of Psychology, Vol 27(4), Nov 2024, 317-332; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-07048-001">doi:10.1037/hop0000261</a></p>The problems addressed in this article are the transition from the Piagetian clinical method to the so-called critical method, that is, the use of objects manipulated by both the experimenter and the child, and the study of the role of Piaget’s female collaborators––in particular Alina Szeminska and Bärbel Inhelder––in the establishment of the critical method. Several authors suggested that Inhelder was behind certain Piagetian experimental devices and the critical method. To evaluate this thesis, we used segment analysis, dealing with the isolable, relevant, and necessary parts of an experiment. Intensive research into Piaget’s research data and publications from the 1920s, compared with the early publications of Szeminska and Inhelder, showed that it was Piaget who, as early as 1922, made the transition from the clinical to the critical method and invented a number of experimental setups, including those attributed to Inhelder. On the other hand, Szeminska appeared as the creator of her experimental design. To interpret this situation, we used the concept of research culture and the focus shifted from priority issues to methodological and social practices: Piaget’s students had to appropriate his research culture, a “system of methods” in a dynamic relationship. This enabled their inclusion into his research programs by learning to create new devices and thus become autonomous disciples. Piaget adopted a strategy of generosity, making available to his students research directions that he had already dealt with, on which they specialized and which he had given priority, thus helping them in their careers. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title><![CDATA[Cortical localization and the nerve cell: Freud’s work in Meynert’s psychiatry clinic.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[Sigmund Freud’s pioneering early work on individuated nerve cells, later termed “neurons,” has long been recognized by the history of psychology. Yet, relatively little has been written about the influence of Freud’s then mentor, Theodor Meynert, on Freud’s 1884–1885 neuroanatomical research, or the monumental conceptual shift embodied in the project itself. Focusing on Freud’s 1884 “Die Struktur der Elemente des Nervensytems” (The Structure of the Elements of the Nervous System) as his first true effort to describe individuated nerve cells, this article identifies Meynert as highly influential on Freud’s turn to representative schema, further suggesting that Freud’s brief foray in clinical neurology at Meynert’s clinic aligns with Freud’s move from the laboratory to the mind. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <link>http://doi.org/10.1037/hop0000263</link> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-16326-001</guid> <pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>Cortical localization and the nerve cell: Freud’s work in Meynert’s psychiatry clinic.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[Sigmund Freud’s pioneering early work on individuated nerve cells, later termed “neurons,” has long been recognized by the history of psychology. Yet, relatively little has been written about the influence of Freud’s then mentor, Theodor Meynert, on Freud’s 1884–1885 neuroanatomical research, or the monumental conceptual shift embodied in the project itself. Focusing on Freud’s 1884 “Die Struktur der Elemente des Nervensytems” (The Structure of the Elements of the Nervous System) as his first true effort to describe individuated nerve cells, this article identifies Meynert as highly influential on Freud’s turn to representative schema, further suggesting that Freud’s brief foray in clinical neurology at Meynert’s clinic aligns with Freud’s move from the laboratory to the mind. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/hop0000263</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>History of Psychology, Vol 27(4), Nov 2024, 333-349; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-16326-001">doi:10.1037/hop0000263</a></p>Sigmund Freud’s pioneering early work on individuated nerve cells, later termed “neurons,” has long been recognized by the history of psychology. Yet, relatively little has been written about the influence of Freud’s then mentor, Theodor Meynert, on Freud’s 1884–1885 neuroanatomical research, or the monumental conceptual shift embodied in the project itself. Focusing on Freud’s 1884 “Die Struktur der Elemente des Nervensytems” (The Structure of the Elements of the Nervous System) as his first true effort to describe individuated nerve cells, this article identifies Meynert as highly influential on Freud’s turn to representative schema, further suggesting that Freud’s brief foray in clinical neurology at Meynert’s clinic aligns with Freud’s move from the laboratory to the mind. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title><![CDATA[The rise and fall of Katherine Blackford’s character analysis.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[Dr. Katherine Blackford’s writings on physiognomy-based character analysis were popular in the business community during the period roughly from 1914 to 1925. I document the rise of the Blackford System of character analysis and discuss how she gained influence in the business community. I outline how industrial psychologists collected data to disprove her theories and I argue that those efforts that attempted to delineate evidence-based practice from her methods were some of the first efforts to show that science mattered in the workplace. In addition, Blackford’s media savviness taught applied psychologists that to have an impact across a broader audience, they needed to better market themselves. Although industrial psychologists succeeded in discrediting Blackford’s system, I argue that her work exerted significant influence on the methodology and practice of early industrial psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <link>http://doi.org/10.1037/hop0000264</link> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-16325-001</guid> <pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>The rise and fall of Katherine Blackford’s character analysis.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[Dr. Katherine Blackford’s writings on physiognomy-based character analysis were popular in the business community during the period roughly from 1914 to 1925. I document the rise of the Blackford System of character analysis and discuss how she gained influence in the business community. I outline how industrial psychologists collected data to disprove her theories and I argue that those efforts that attempted to delineate evidence-based practice from her methods were some of the first efforts to show that science mattered in the workplace. In addition, Blackford’s media savviness taught applied psychologists that to have an impact across a broader audience, they needed to better market themselves. Although industrial psychologists succeeded in discrediting Blackford’s system, I argue that her work exerted significant influence on the methodology and practice of early industrial psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/hop0000264</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>History of Psychology, Vol 27(4), Nov 2024, 350-370; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-16325-001">doi:10.1037/hop0000264</a></p>Dr. Katherine Blackford’s writings on physiognomy-based character analysis were popular in the business community during the period roughly from 1914 to 1925. I document the rise of the Blackford System of character analysis and discuss how she gained influence in the business community. I outline how industrial psychologists collected data to disprove her theories and I argue that those efforts that attempted to delineate evidence-based practice from her methods were some of the first efforts to show that science mattered in the workplace. In addition, Blackford’s media savviness taught applied psychologists that to have an impact across a broader audience, they needed to better market themselves. Although industrial psychologists succeeded in discrediting Blackford’s system, I argue that her work exerted significant influence on the methodology and practice of early industrial psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title><![CDATA[William James on unification.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[The major focus of this work is on William James’s insistence that unification should not be explored in the abstract as if it were one thing. Rather, unity should be understood in terms of its major kinds. There are unities and pluralities with respect to such topics as values, methods, causes, and prescriptions about what to read and study. This article explores James’s mature position on unification as set forth in his major psychological and philosophical works and letters. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <link>http://doi.org/10.1037/hop0000265</link> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-22484-001</guid> <pubDate>Mon, 09 Sep 2024 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>William James on unification.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[The major focus of this work is on William James’s insistence that unification should not be explored in the abstract as if it were one thing. Rather, unity should be understood in terms of its major kinds. There are unities and pluralities with respect to such topics as values, methods, causes, and prescriptions about what to read and study. This article explores James’s mature position on unification as set forth in his major psychological and philosophical works and letters. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/hop0000265</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>History of Psychology, Vol 27(4), Nov 2024, 371-383; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-22484-001">doi:10.1037/hop0000265</a></p>The major focus of this work is on William James’s insistence that unification should not be explored in the abstract as if it were one thing. Rather, unity should be understood in terms of its major kinds. There are unities and pluralities with respect to such topics as values, methods, causes, and prescriptions about what to read and study. This article explores James’s mature position on unification as set forth in his major psychological and philosophical works and letters. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item> <title><![CDATA[Herman G. Canady: A reintroduction.]]></title> <description><![CDATA[For nearly four decades, Herman G. Canady actively promoted psychological science in the public interest. A skillful leader and administrator, Canady helped to establish one of the first national organizations of Black psychologists and was purportedly one of the founding members of the West Virginia State Psychological Association. He also collaborated with a diverse range of professional colleagues on relevant social issues of the time. Despite the depth and breadth of Canady’s contributions to psychology, very little is known about his impact on the field. The goal of this article is to reintroduce the discipline to Canady. Drawing upon a range of archival materials, personal correspondence, and interviews, I highlight how Canady used the platform of psychological science in ways that not only redefined “racial psychology,” but also brought attention to educational inequities, stressed the importance of institution-building, and demonstrated the utility of cross-cultural alliances for addressing important social causes. Canady’s influence—and that of others of his generation—merits further study and deeper analysis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></description> <link>http://doi.org/10.1037/hop0000266</link> <guid isPermaLink="false">http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-23963-001</guid> <pubDate>Thu, 12 Sep 2024 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate> <dc:title>Herman G. Canady: A reintroduction.</dc:title> <dc:description><![CDATA[For nearly four decades, Herman G. Canady actively promoted psychological science in the public interest. A skillful leader and administrator, Canady helped to establish one of the first national organizations of Black psychologists and was purportedly one of the founding members of the West Virginia State Psychological Association. He also collaborated with a diverse range of professional colleagues on relevant social issues of the time. Despite the depth and breadth of Canady’s contributions to psychology, very little is known about his impact on the field. The goal of this article is to reintroduce the discipline to Canady. Drawing upon a range of archival materials, personal correspondence, and interviews, I highlight how Canady used the platform of psychological science in ways that not only redefined “racial psychology,” but also brought attention to educational inequities, stressed the importance of institution-building, and demonstrated the utility of cross-cultural alliances for addressing important social causes. Canady’s influence—and that of others of his generation—merits further study and deeper analysis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)]]></dc:description> <dc:identifier>10.1037/hop0000266</dc:identifier> <dc:type>Journal Article</dc:type> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>History of Psychology, Vol 27(4), Nov 2024, 384-393; <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2025-23963-001">doi:10.1037/hop0000266</a></p>For nearly four decades, Herman G. Canady actively promoted psychological science in the public interest. A skillful leader and administrator, Canady helped to establish one of the first national organizations of Black psychologists and was purportedly one of the founding members of the West Virginia State Psychological Association. He also collaborated with a diverse range of professional colleagues on relevant social issues of the time. Despite the depth and breadth of Canady’s contributions to psychology, very little is known about his impact on the field. The goal of this article is to reintroduce the discipline to Canady. Drawing upon a range of archival materials, personal correspondence, and interviews, I highlight how Canady used the platform of psychological science in ways that not only redefined “racial psychology,” but also brought attention to educational inequities, stressed the importance of institution-building, and demonstrated the utility of cross-cultural alliances for addressing important social causes. Canady’s influence—and that of others of his generation—merits further study and deeper analysis. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved) ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>