Beyond the Schools of Psychology 1: A Digital Analysis of <i>Psychological Review</i>, 1894–1903

Green, Christopher D.; Feinerer, Ingo; Burman, Jeremy Trevelyan

doi:10.1002/jhbs.21592

Cited by 31 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One increasingly important method, differential text analysis, may at least partially address this. Here, entities such as scholarly communities are treated as corpora (bodies of text), then compared to extract or interpret their meaning (Green, Feinerer, & Burman, 2013Schwartz et al, 2013). Words which empirically differentiate between communities can, in a non-arbitrary way, help label their contents.…”

Section: Academic Areas As Network and Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the Relationship Between “Personality” and “Social” Psychologies? Network, Community, and Whole Text Analyses of The Structure of Contemporary Scholarship

Lanning

2017

Collabra: Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The structure of social/personality psychology, including the relationship between the areas of "social" and "personality," is empirically examined in a series of network, community, and text analyses. In a study of keywords, both attitudes and social cognition and group processes appear as communities; the role of personality is more diffuse. In a larger analysis of citations in the four primary journals in the combined social/personality area, personality appears as a large community which surrounds a well-defined core (the Five-Factor Model) but which lies on the periphery of social/personality psychology. Interpersonal relations and attachment are central in social/personality, and appear largely distinct from the study of groups. Attitudes and social cognition are broadly studied, but, in contrast with personality and interpersonal relations, are not structured around a simple core. These methods and results collectively inform the relationship between personality and social psychologies and provide an early step towards an empirical understanding of the structure of the discipline.Keywords: personality; network; scientometric; social psychology; methods; community How should the map of social-personality psychology be drawn? What are the relationships among its constituent methods, institutions, papers, scholars, and constructs? The question has implications for the psychology curriculum (How should personality and social psychologies be taught?), for the nature and evaluation of our research (Should a scholar who examines positive affect be asked to review a paper on extraversion?), and even for our selfconcepts (Should I call myself a social psychologist?). Yet our understanding of this terrain remains grounded more in anecdote and tradition than in data. In the present paper, I use diverse scientometric methods, including network, community, and text analysis, to provide an initial map of the combined field of social and personality psychology. Limitations of the work should be acknowledged at the outset: This effort provides only a contemporary snapshot of the field and not its evolution over time, it does not yet provide contextualize personality and social psychology in the region of other closely related areas of inquiry (such as developmental and cognitive psychologies), and it does not yet consider the extent to which the structure holds outside of prominent conferences and journals published in the United States. Despite these limitations, the methods form an initial toolbox for future study, and the results provide a coherent initial map of contemporary personality-social psychology. Perhaps equally importantly, the paper invites consideration of its central premise, i.e., that the structure of personality and social psychology -fields which take justifiable pride in their empirical achievements -is of consequence and can itself be studied empirically.

show abstract

Section: Academic Areas As Network and Communitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the Relationship Between “Personality” and “Social” Psychologies? Network, Community, and Whole Text Analyses of The Structure of Contemporary Scholarship

Lanning

2017

Collabra: Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research on and teaching of the history of psychology must more intensively extend the leading methods of the person (“great men”) approach, problem history approach, history of thought approach (with its concept of evolvement), and social history approach to quantitative scientometric methods, semantic technologies, and time series analyses in historiography (see, e.g., Green et al 2013, 2014, 2015; Simonton 2006, 2014). Up to now, scientometrics and time series analyses are frequently criticized and devaluated in historical research and instruction because of their alleged purely descriptive, superficial, and cursory approach.…”

Section: Discussion and Outlook On The Future And Some Impulses For Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientometric trend analyses of publications on the history of psychology: Is psychology becoming an unhistorical science?

Krampen

2016

Scientometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Examines scientometrically the trends in and the recent situation of research on and the teaching of the history of psychology in the German-speaking countries and compares the findings with the situation in other countries (mainly the United States) by means of the psychology databases PSYNDEX and PsycINFO. Declines of publications on the history of psychology are described scientometrically for both research communities since the 1990s. Some impulses are suggested for the future of research on and the teaching of the history of psychology. These include (1) the necessity and significance of an intensified use of quantitative, unobtrusive scientometric methods in historiography in times of digital “big data”, (2) the necessity and possibilities to integrate qualitative and quantitative methodologies in historical research and teaching, (3) the reasonableness of interdisciplinary cooperation of specialist historians, scientometricians, and psychologists, (4) the meaningfulness and necessity to explore, investigate, and teach more intensively the past and the problem history of psychology as well as the understanding of the subject matter of psychology in its historical development in cultural contexts. The outlook on the future of such a more up-to-date research on and teaching of the history of psychology is—with some caution—positive.

show abstract

“…In the case of typological schools, the most obvious are analyses of textbooks (Platt, 2008). Recently, another research design has been suggested by Green et al (2013). Their approach has been to quantify the level of verbal similarity between pairs of articles published in a predefined period in a selected journal.…”

Section: Methodological Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Schools in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: Concepts and Historical Relevance

Dayé

2015

International Encyclopedia of the Social &Amp; Behavioral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Beyond the Schools of Psychology 1: A Digital Analysis of Psychological Review, 1894–1903

Cited by 31 publications

References 20 publications

What is the Relationship Between “Personality” and “Social” Psychologies? Network, Community, and Whole Text Analyses of The Structure of Contemporary Scholarship

What is the Relationship Between “Personality” and “Social” Psychologies? Network, Community, and Whole Text Analyses of The Structure of Contemporary Scholarship

Scientometric trend analyses of publications on the history of psychology: Is psychology becoming an unhistorical science?

Schools in the Social and Behavioral Sciences: Concepts and Historical Relevance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About