History of psychology; A cultural perspective

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis,  Oct 2006  by Gravitz, Melvin A

• E-mail
• Print
• Link

O'Boyle, C.G (2006). History of psychology; A culturalperspective.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Reviewed by David T. Schmit, PhJX, College of SL Catherine, SL Paul, MN.

Writing a history of psychology is a formidable task. How to frame such a gargantuan, epoch-transcending topic? Should the writer take the long view, and begin with the Classical Greeks? Or take the short view, and write a history of the institutionalization of the field only, picking up the story in the late 187Os? Either route, there are rewards for those who successfully write a history of psychology text. Since nearly all BA programs and many graduate programs in psychology in the US require such a course, the best books are guaranteed an automatic readership.

This is where Cherie G. O'Boyle's new text, History of Psychology: A Cultural Perspective, comes in. O'Boyle, professor of psychology at California State University, San Marcos, has written an undergraduate text that takes the ambitious long view, with separate chapters for the Classical Greeks, Medieval Era thinkers, proceeding through the scientific revolution, advances in physiology, and so on. Think of all the historic, scientific, and philosophical literature the author of her approach must distill into manageable chapters! As is typical among the "long view" texts, O'Boyle's narrative improves when she reaches the 20th century due to the fact that the field institutionalizes, creating clearer boundaries for professional psychological discourse. Since O'BoyIe is an academic psychologist - true for most of the authors of these texts - she moves onto familiar territory in the 20th century, breeding a stronger narrative and a richer reference base.

History of Psychology,': A Cultural Perspective is offered at a time when advances in the historiography of psychology have opened up new horizons to psychology's story of itself. Up until a couple of decades ago, most history of psychology textbooks employed a "presentist" orientation, wherein the past's intellectual discoveries are lined up in such a way that they seem to "anticipate" current psychology. Past works deemed key to current theories and findings are centrally positioned within such a narrative, while other developments are marginalized (and sometimes ignored altogether). History, unfortunately, does not operate in such an insular and sanitary way.

Enter the "new" history of psychology, to counter this "old" history. Initiated in a landmark 1989 article by Laurel Furomoto, the new history challenges this "presentist" framework with an historicism that recognizes the complex positioning of psychological inquiry within a cultural period. In the new historicism, the present state of the field is not the baseline for evaluating history's offerings. Rather, inquiries about mind and behavior initiated by history's investigators are framed by a given era's prevailing ideologies, methods, tools, and resources. To achieve these ends, the new historicists expand the literatures of analysis to include letters and diaries. They engage in the "close reading" of texts, to discern underlying motives and assumptions driving psychological inquiry. They study the popular press to understand the application and positioning of psychology within the broader culture. And they embrace the literature of marginalized groups and figures - women, people of color, and non-westerners - to gather insights into how the exercise of power and positioning within the social hierarchy informs the character of psychological inquiry. The result is subversive, in that the Enlightenment-originating meta-narrative wherein the "march of science" is portrayed as a rationalistic project progressively subsuming the unknown within ever-more understandable rubrics of knowledge is undermined. A more contextualized history emerges, wherein scientific breakthroughs are framed within an intricate weave of evolving perspectives, philosophical discourse and cultural dynamics.

Mesmerism and hypnotism have fared well in the new history, recognized anew for their contributions to the development of the field. Yet the new historicism also documents psychology's complicity in perpetuating racism, classicism, and ethnocentrism. For all its claims to epistemological exceptionalism, even science is captive to the throbs and throes of cultural currents.

O'Boyle's History of Psychology recognizes the new historicism in several ways. Developments in the field are contextualized by placing them within their cultural milieu, and insets are provided describing changes to the public and personal sphere, such as military conflicts, technological advances, and alterations to daily life. The author also attempts to incorporate a feminist perspective into the story, another welcome addition. Although less contingent upon the new historicism, O'Boyle avoids the "great man" approach to psychology's history. Instead, she focuses on the development of ideas, with recurring explorations of how the epistemology of psychological questions has changed over time.