Indigenization of Psychology: Empirical Assessment of Progress in Indian Research

Abstract

The development of an indigenous psychology has generally been documented by examples of indigenous constructs and conceptual analyses of their emergence. In contrast, the present article proposes an empirical approach. Indigenization is conceived as a gradual process that may be operationalized, and measured by content analysis of journal articles as the discipline develops and changes. Measures are proposed to assess the extent to which the concepts, problems, hypotheses, methods, and tests: (a) emanate from, (b) adequately represent, and (c) reflect back upon, the cultural context in which behaviour is observed. Application of these to 355 empirical and 31 theoretical articles from Indian journals and 39 foreign empirical articles published by Indian psychologists, indicates some slight movement toward an indigenous discipline, and some interesting relationships that assist in understanding its development. Factors contributing to indigenization and the utility of the empirical approach are discussed.

Changing Perspectives in Social Psychology in India: A Journey Towards Indigenization

“…Sinha, 1993). Second, as Adair, Puhan, & Vohra (1993) have pointed out, the process is slow, but signs of its emergence are evident. One is optimistic that in years to come, social psychology in India will acquire a new look and a new identity by ''outgrowing the alien framework'' (Sinha, 1987).…”

Cross-Cultural Social and Organizational Psychology

“…There is some indication of growing reliance upon theories held by scholars indigenous to India (Adair et al 1993) and other countries (Kim & Berry 1993). Some textbooks are introducing more cross-cultural material, and the journal Psychology and Developing Societies has been established.…”

The explosion of knowledge, references, and citations: Psychology's unique response to a crisis.

“…References were counted within each sampled empirical article for the periods 1972-1974, 1978 -1980, 1984 -1986, 1990 -1992, 1996 -1998, and 2000. These dates and intervals were selected within the context of previous studies (J. G. Adair, Puhan, & Vohra, 1993;Vohra & Adair, 1991), extended through 1996 -1998, and brought up to date by the inclusion of data for the year 2000. Brief reports, book reviews, editorials and commentaries, secondary analyses of data, and reviews of the literature were excluded from our analyses.…”