The fragmentation of psychology: Are APA divisions symptomatic?

Harari, Herbert; Peters, Jean M.

doi:10.1037/0003-066x.42.8.822

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

(1 reference statement)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Psychology, like any discipline, actively, if covertly, selects its objects of study and devises a canon, in which the objects of study are ranked from more to less important. In a recent ranking of divisions of the American Psychological Association, the Division of the Psychology of Women (which ironically is one of the larger divisions) was perceived as 33rd out of 40 in importance and in the lowest category of interest (Harari & Peters, 1987).…”

Section: Transformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychology Reconstructs The Female: 1968–1988

Crawford

Marecek

1989

Psychology of Women Quarterly

177

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent work on the psychology of gender is pluralistic, stemming from varied specialty areas within psychology, grounded in several intellectual frameworks, and reflecting a spectrum of feminist perspectives. This article is a critical appraisal of diverse approaches to the study of women and gender. it first describes prefeminist or "womanless" psychology, then analyzes four coexisting frameworks that have generated recent research. The four frameworks are: Exceptional Women, in which empirical research focuses on the correlates of high achievement for women, and women's history in the discipline i s reevaluated; Women as Problem (or Anomaly), in which research emphasizes explanations for female "deficiencies" (e.g., fear of success); the Psychology of Gender, in which the focus of inquiry shifts from women to gender, conceived as a principle of social organization that structures relations between women and men; and a (currently relatively undeveloped) Transformation framework that reflexively challenges the values, assumptions, and normative practices of the discipline. Examples of research programs within each a p proach are described, and the strengths and limitations of each approach are critically examined.

show abstract

Section: Transformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychology Reconstructs The Female: 1968–1988

Crawford

Marecek

1989

Psychology of Women Quarterly

177

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The timely (August 1987) Psychology in the Public Forum focus on mental retardation services and issues (Robinson, 1987), interestingly, appeared in the same issue as the Harari and Peters (1987) survey analysis that found the American Psychological Association (APA)’s Division on Mental Retardation to be among the 14 divisions that were perceived to be of little importance and of low interest to APA members. The variety of involvements of psychologists, described in part or implied by Baumeister (1987), Scott and Carran (1987), Schroeder, Schroeder, and Landesman (1987), and Landesman and Butterfield (1987) stand in stark contrast with the Harari and Peters ratings of importance and interest.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Professional and technical opportunities for psychologists in mental retardation.

Jacobson¹,

Knox²

1989

American Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The fragmentation of psychology: Are APA divisions symptomatic?

Cited by 2 publications

References 1 publication

Psychology Reconstructs The Female: 1968–1988

Psychology Reconstructs The Female: 1968–1988

Professional and technical opportunities for psychologists in mental retardation.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About