APA presidential addresses: The relation of integrative complexity to historical, professional, and personal factors.

Abstract

The 85 extant presidential addresses of the American Psychological Association (APA) were scored for integrative complexity, a factor denned by the degree of differentiation and integration of dimensions along which information is processed. As in previous studies, complexity was lower when the United States was engaged in a war. This predicted effect of societal stress was not found in times of economic difficulty nor during United States presidential election years. APA presidents who were judged as particularly eminent by senior colleagues gave addresses higher in complexity; there was no difference as a function of other types of eminence ratings nor objective measures (publication and citation counts). No sex or age difference was found, but there was a positive correlation between complexity and the number of years of life remaining to the individual. An examination of professional orientation indicated that a tendency away from conventional scientific rigor was associated with higher complexity.

Varieties of (Scientific) Creativity: A Hierarchical Model of Domain-Specific Disposition, Development, and Achievement

“…I might also cite another relevant finding concerning integrative complexity, the factor that discriminates eminent human-science-oriented psychologists from equally eminent naturalscience-oriented psychologists (Suedfeld, 1985). Feist (1994) found that integrative complexity was positively associated with peer-rated eminence for natural scientists, as were total citations received in the professional literature.…”

“…On a far more limited scale regarding the number of variables investigated was Suedfeld's (1985) content analysis of addresses delivered by presidents of the American Psychological Association. The speeches were scored on integrative complexity: a measure of how many divergent perspectives a person can take into consideration and whether the person can integrate these perspectives into a coherent viewpoint.…”

Significant samples: The psychological study of eminent individuals.

“…At the other extreme are those investigators who define the sampling criterion in terms of explicit and objective rules, a practice almost universal in psychometric and historiometric inquiries. The most common of these sampling rules an: (a) nominations by experts in the field (e.g., Baltes, Staudinger, Maercker, & Smith, 1995;Coan, 1973), (b) occupation of special positions, such as political leaders or television news broadcasters (e.g., Mullen et al, 1986;Zweigenhaft, 1975); (c) receipt of major honors, such as Nobel prizes or Olympic gold medals (e.g., Medvec, Madey, & Gilovich, 1995;Suedfeld, 1985;Wertheimer, 1982), and (d) conspicuous representation in archival sources, such as encyclopedias, biographical dictionaries, histories, citation indexes, or obituaries (e.g., Farnsworth, 1969;Harrison, Struthers, & Moore, 1988;Suedfeld & Bluck, 1993). The specific method chosen usually depends on other features of the study, such as the nature of the hypothesis or whether the measures are to be direct or indirect.…”

VII. A Dialectical Understanding of Biological Politics

“…Conceptually similar to dialectics is integrative complexity, a construct from social psychology. Both dialectics and integrative complexity involve a readiness for accepting and resolving contradictions as well as an openness to change and uncertainty (Suedfeld, 1985). Research indicates that integrative complexity in political speeches and writing tends to diminish during periods of war or severe hardship (Tetlock, 1988), implying that reductionistic views may be more 'comforting' or acceptable during periods of high stress.…”