The Origins and Development of Social Psychology in Canada Paper

The Origins and Development of Social Psychology in Canada Paper The Origins and Development of Social Psychology in Canada Paper ORDER NOW FOR CUSTOMIZED AND ORIGINAL NURSING PAPERS Unformatted Attachment Preview International Journal of Psychology ISSN: 0020-7594 (Print) 1464-066X (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pijp20 The origins and development of social psychology in Canada John G. Adair To cite this article: John G. Adair (2005) The origins and development of social psychology in Canada, International Journal of Psychology, 40:4, 277-288, DOI: 10.1080/00207590444000212 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00207590444000212 Published online: 12 Apr 2011. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 34 View related articles Citing articles: 1 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=pijp20 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY, 2005, 40 (4), 277–288 The origins and development of social psychology in Canada John G. Adair University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada T his article provides an overview of the historical events, significant personalities, and contextual influences that have shaped the development of social psychology in Canada. For much of its history, Canada and its closest neighbour, the US, have shared similar social problems and, for a time, even research funding. Although the influence of the US has been imprinted on Canadian research and theory, Canadian social psychology has also developed its own discipline with a focus on culture and explicitly Canadian social issues that makes it distinct from that of the US. This account reveals how Canadian social psychology developed and where US influence has been felt. Emerging from its roots within philosophy, Canadian psychology began as a decidedly applied discipline; but following its widely acknowledged contributions to the Canadian war effort it was basic research that ultimately received the academic appointments and financial support. Social psychology was often invisible; to be found, if at all, only on the fringe of both these early developments.The Origins and Development of Social Psychology in Canada Paper In the 1970s, the Canadian government’s decision to fund social research, and a period of exceptional growth of higher education, contributed to the discipline’s emergence. Substantial numbers of experimental social psychologists imported from the United States raised questions about the Canadian content of their teaching and research, but their perspective and numbers created the critical mass needed for advancement of our discipline. With the help of a partly government-imposed Canadianization of academia and a blending of these imported researchers with the culture-oriented researchers trained in Canada, social psychology evolved into the mature, distinctive discipline that exists in Canada today. Canada has a strong, self-sustaining national disicpline, that in accord with its size makes substantial contributions to the world of psychology and to the social psychology of North America. This developmental history describes how these accomplishments have been realized. C et article pre?sente une vue d’ensemble sur les e?ve?nements historiques, les personnalite?s significatives et les influences contextuelles qui ont fac?onne? le de?veloppement de la psychologie sociale au Canada. Pour une grande partie de son histoire, le Canada et ses voisins proches, les E?tats-Unis, ont partage? les me?mes proble?mes sociaux et, pour un temps, les re?sultats de recherche. Quoique l’influence des E?tats-Unis fu?t impre?gne?e dans la recherche et la the?orie au Canada, la psychologie sociale canadienne a aussi de?veloppe? sa propre discipline en mettant l’accent sur la culture et, explicitement, sur les enjeux sociaux canadiens, la distinguant ainsi de celle des E?tats-Unis. Ce re?sume? re?ve?le comment la psychologie sociale canadienne s’est de?veloppe?e et ou? l’influence e?tatsunienne s’est fait sentir. Prenant racine a? l’inte?rieur de la philosophie, la psychologie canadienne a de?bute? comme une discipline re?solument applique?e. Mais suite aux contributions largement reconnues de l’effort canadien dans la guerre, ce fut la recherche fondamentale qui a finalement cre?e? plus de postes acade?miques et qui a rec?u plus de soutien financier. La psychologie sociale e?tait souvent invisible, a? de?couvrir, mais encore, seulement en marge de ses de?veloppements initiaux. Dans les anne?es 1970, la de?cision du gouvernement canadien de subventionner la recherche sociale ainsi que la pe?riode de de?veloppement exceptionnel de l’e?ducation de niveau supe?rieur ont contribue? a? l’e?mergence de la discipline. Le nombre substantiel de psychologues sociaux expe?rimentaux en provenance des E?tats-Unis a souleve? des questions a? propos du contenu canadien propose? dans leurs enseignements et dans leurs e?tudes. Toutefois, leur perspective et leur nombre a cre?e? une masse critique ne?cessaire Correspondence should be addressed to John G. Adair, Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, R3T 2N2 (E-mail: [email protected]). An abbreviated version of this article was first presented in a symposium (A. Paivio (Chair) Psychology in Canada) held at the International Congress of Psychology, Montreal, August, 1996. The author’s research in the preparation of this manuscript was supported by a grant from the Social Science and Humanities Research Council Canada.The Origins and Development of Social Psychology in Canada Paper The author wishes to express his appreciation to Jessica Cameron, Kenneth L. Dion, Abraham Ross, Donald Sharpe, Peter Suedfeld, and Mary Wright for their comments and suggestions on earlier drafts of this manuscript, and to Angela Coelho and Kristin Stevens for assistance in its preparation. # 2005 International Union of Psychological Science http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pp/00207594.html DOI: 10.1080/00207590444000212 278 ADAIR pour l’avancement de notre discipline. La tendance partiellement impose? par le gouvernement a? rendre canadien le secteur acade?mique et le me?lange de chercheurs importe?s et de chercheurs forme?s au Canada oriente?s vers la culture, la psychologie sociale canadienne a e?volue? en tant que discipline mature et distincte. Le Canada posse?de une discipline nationale forte et auto-soutenante qui, en accord avec son importance, apporte des contributions substantielles au monde de la psychologie et de la psychologie sociale en Ame?rique du Nord. Cette histoire de?veloppementale de?crit comment ces accomplissements ont e?te? re?alise?s. E ste art??culo proporciona un panorama de los sucesos histo?ricos, personalidades importantes, e influencias contextuales que han dado forma al desarrollo de la psicolog??a social en Canada?. Durante gran parte de su historia, Canada? y su vecino ma?s cercano, los Estados Unidos, han compartido problemas sociales similares y, durante algu?n tiempo, au?n el financiamiento de la investigacio?n. A pesar de que la influencia de Estados Unidos ha quedado grabada en la investigacio?n y teor??a canadienses, la psicolog??a social canadiense ha desarrollado tambie?n su propia disciplina con un enfoque en la cultura y expl??citamente en la problema?tica social canadiense que la distingue de la estadounidense. Esta resen?a revela como se desarrollo? la psicolog??a social canadiense y do?nde se ha sentido la influencia de los Estados Unidos. Al surgir de sus ra??ces dentro de la filosofia, la psicolog??a canadiense comenzo? como una disciplina decisivamente aplicada, pero, a ra??z de sus ampliamente reconocidas contribuciones al esfuerzo canadiense en la guerra, fue la investigacio?n ba?sica la que en u?ltima instancia recibio? los nombramientos acade?micos y el apoyo financiero. La psicolog??a social permanecio? con frecuencia invisible, para encontrarse, si se encontraba del todo, al margen solamente de estos desarrollos iniciales. En los an?os setenta, la decisio?n del gobierno canadiense de financiar investigacio?n social, y un periodo de crecimiento excepcional de la educacio?n superior contribuyeron al surgimiento de la disciplina. Un nu?mero considerable de psico?logos sociales experimentales importados de los Estados Unidos se cuestiono? sobre el contenido canadiense de su ensen?anza e investigacio?n, pero su perspectiva y nu?meros crearon la masa cr??tica necesaria para el avance de nuestra disciplina. Con la ayuda de la tendencia a lo canadiense de la academia parcialmente impuesta por el gobierno y la mezcla de estos investigadores importados con los investigadores orientados a la cultura formados en Canada?, la psicolog??a social evoluciono? hacia la disciplina madura y distintiva que existe hoy en Canada?. Canada? posee una disciplina nacional fuerte, auto sostenida que, de acuerdo con su taman?o contribuye considerablemente al mundo de la psicolog??a y a la psicolog??a social de Ame?rica del Norte. Esta historia del desarrollo describe co?mo se han realizado estos logros.The Origins and Development of Social Psychology in Canada Paper Social psychology is influenced by the importance and type of social problems of the day, and consequently, the funding available to study these social influences and issues. For much of the history of Canadian social psychology, Canada and their closest neighbour, the US, have shared similar social problems and, at times, even funding. Due to this shared experience, Canadian and American disciplines have been so intertwined that it is a challenge to write about an indigenous or distinctive Canadian social psychology. In many ways, Canadian and US social psychologists contribute towards a shared scientific community devoted to discovering universals through rigorous experimental methods. Although the proximity and influence of the US has clearly been imprinted on Canadian research and theory, Canadian social psychology has also developed its own discipline distinct from that of the US. Its focus on culture and explicitly Canadian social issues has provided a rich and distinctive study of social psychology. Indeed, these conditions for discipline development are so unique compared to those encountered elsewhere, that for this article I have attempted to write a developmental history of the discipline of social psychology in Canada, focusing on how Canadian social psychology has evolved as a partner in North American psychology. I have provided an overview of the historical events, significant personalities, and contextual influences that have shaped the development of social psychology in Canada from its beginnings nearly a century ago to the present. As I reconstruct the discipline’s evolution and changing nature and describe the unique character of Canadian social psychology, this account will reveal where US influence has been felt, the issues it has raised, and the contributions it has made to the discipline in Canada. Canada has a strong, self-sustaining national discipline, and in accord with its size makes substantial contributions to the world of psychology and to the social psychology of North America. This developmental history describes how these accomplishments have been realized. EARLY YEARS: WITHIN PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENTS (1910–1938) Canadian psychology had its beginnings within philosophy with the appointment of James Mark Baldwin to the University of Toronto in 1889 (C. R. Myers, 1982). In most universities SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY IN CANADA psychology remained formally linked to departments of philosophy well into the 1940s and in some even into the 1950s. Within philosophy the early emphasis was on basic aspects of perception, sensation, thinking, and learning. Social psychology was occasionally included, but usually by only 1-hour lectures on the topic. By 1913 the first formal course in social psychology was taught at McGill University (Ferguson, 1982). The Origins and Development of Social Psychology in Canada Paper Henry Wright introduced a social psychology course in Manitoba in 1923 (M. W. Wright, 1982), and soon it was offered in a number of universities throughout the country. However, its infrequent and limited mention in the histories of Canadian academic departments (M. J. Wright & Myers, 1982) is suggestive of social psychology’s relatively lesser status within the emerging discipline. Even in these early years, there was considerable US–Canadian competition and exchange over academic appointments. Baldwin remained in Toronto for only 4 years, leaving in 1893 to take up a position at Princeton. Application for his replacement came from E. B. Titchener of Cornell University. William McDougall, who at the time was in England, was highly regarded for his Social Psychology text, which had become required reading for most early social psychology courses. In 1909, McDougall and W. D. Tait were considered for appointment as director of the McGill Psychological Laboratories. The appointment was given to Tait (Ferguson, 1982). In 1915, the University of British Columbia approached McDougall, who by then had moved from University College (London) to Oxford University, with an offer to become head of a to-becreated department of philosophy and psychology (Mackay, 1982). After extensive negotiations, he declined. Within a few years he accepted the position as head of the department at Harvard University. The fact that he was considered for these appointments in Canada didn’t indicate a change in the lesser status of social psychology, although it gives pause to wonder what might have been with a McDougall appointment; and with his appointment to a Canadian instead of an American university. Another prominent social psychologist who was trained at McGill and subsequently appointed as professor of psychology at Columbia University was Otto Klineberg. Klineberg went on to a distinguished career as an early advocate of the role of culture in social psychology. He had obtained his bachelor’s and medical degrees from McGill before moving on to Columbia University for his PhD (Ferguson, 1982). Not only does his career provide yet another example of the porous 279 academic border between Canada and the US; his early education in Montreal suggests a hint of the roots from which the distinctive cultural flavour of Canadian social psychology was later to emerge. These roots were not limited to Quebec, but extended across all of Canada. At the University of British Columbia, Jack Irving, the philosophytrained head of the department of philosophy and psychology, personally introduced and taught as early as 1940 an undergraduate course on the psychology of culture (Mackay, 1982). As the 1930s drew to a close, psychology clearly had gained a place in universities, but aside from Toronto (1926) and McGill (1924), it was not an administratively independent discipline. Because of the absence of research training within philosophy departments, Canadian psychology evolved in an applied direction: mental health, community psychology, and the study of children and the family were its strengths. There was a strong desire to demonstrate the utility of the new discipline, and a public demand for what they hoped psychology could offer. The Origins and Development of Social Psychology in Canada Paper Unlike other countries, where psychology was imported anew from the US, Canadian psychology had developed on its own and yet partly as an extension of US psychology. Twenty of the 40 Canadian academics identified in 1938, just prior to the establishment of the Canadian Psychological Association, had obtained their highest degree from a Canadian university, 11 from the US, 8 from the UK, and 1 from Germany. But the ties to the US were substantial. Most psychologists in Canada were members of the APA, which they had helped found, and the APA had held its 1931 annual meeting in Toronto (M. J. Wright, 1974, p. 113). SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY GOES TO WAR AND RETURNS (1939–1955) Because it was clear that the US could not be counted on for quick entrance into the anticipated war (WWII) that was about to engulf Britain and thereby involve Canada, the Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) was formed in 1939 (M. J. Wright, 1974), for the express purpose of mobilizing and coordinating the participation of Canadian psychologists in war-related research and psychological services. Their wartime contributions were primarily through testing, personnel selection, and training research. The contributions of psychologists were so impressive that the Defence Research Board thought it useful to continue funding psychological research for more than a decade after the end of the war. Social 280 ADAIR psychologists had prominently contributed: A. S. Bois, soon to become an industrial psychologist, worked on troop morale; Jack Irving (1943) contributed to the understanding of rumour transmission, and J. D. Ketchum administered the research section of the newly created Wartime Information Bureau (M. J. Wright, 1974). Specialty identification as social, clinical, or applied psychologists was not as sharply defined as it is today, but the war and the return to peacetime changed much of that. Buoyed by the success of these wartime collaborations, a peacetime CPA embarked on an effort to identify additional topics to which future joint research efforts might be applied (Bernhardt, 1947; Ketchum, 1947b; MacLeod, 1947). For social psychology, the need for concentrated research on the cultural diversity of Canada’s population, and in particular on French–English relations, was noted. Although social psychology had achieved an identity and a place in the teaching curriculum, at the end of the war it was poorly developed compared to other fields within Canadian psychology (Ketchum, 1948). This was due in part to the ill-defined nature of the field: vague concepts, inadequate methods, and problems so large that they did not seem easily broken down into researchable topics. Students and faculty felt that social research was more difficult than laboratory study, and not sufficiently distinct from sociology or anthropology. Prospective students were discouraged and attracted to betterdefined fields with more job prospects. These problems were not unique to Canadian social psychology, but were general discipline concerns as the boundaries (Good, 2000) and preferred methods (Danziger, 2000; McMartin & Winston, 2000; Stam, Radtke, & Lubek, 2000) for social psychological research were in the process of being defined. A second problem was the ineffectiveness of graduate training, largely due to the absence of any significant social research by the faculty. Most were not empirically oriented, were frustrated by attempts to apply the behaviourist model to social phenomena, and spent much of their scholarly activity focused on this fundamental theoretical dilemma. Some, such as R. B. MacLeod (1947, 1955), head of the department at McGill, held the view that the expansion of research into social psychology left us with a field that was both conceptually and methodologically ill-equipped for the task, and that it would need a ‘‘fresh start’’ in what he felt should be a phenomenological approach. MacLeod pursued this approach more fully after he left Canada for Cornell University. But this orientation appealed to leading Canadian social psychologists. Henry Wright, the founding head of the University of Manitoba psychology department, for example, emphasized the meaning of the stimulus for the person in contrast to regarding the stimulus simply as a physical event (H. W. Wright, 1950). J. D. ‘‘Dave’’ Ketchum, editor of the Canadian Journal of Psychology (1953–1958), saw social psychology torn by demands for explanations on the basis of needs and drives whereas a more cognitive, phenomenological explanation made greater sense (Ketchum, 1951). He argued that psychology was increasingly applied to real-life situations where mechanistic theories and approaches were less adequate. Ketchum’s major scholarly contribution was a book detailing his personal observations of the social structure that emerged among prisoners who occupied a makeshift PO … Purchase answer to see full attachment Get a 10 % discount on an order above $ 100 Use the following coupon code : NURSING10