Abstract
Sociological social psychology (SSP) and psychological social psychology (PSP) have both generated literatures of self-criticism and disciplinary crisis. These respective literatures have quite different origins. Critiques of sociology in general have been applied to SSP in particular. In PSP the crisis began with methodological and ethical issues. An analysis of the two ensuing crisis literatures reveals a common concern with (a) a perceived tendency for social psychological research to be increasingly generated and subsumed by non-social psychological areas in both parent disciplines, and, (b) the cultural and historical specificity of research dealing with processes in social interaction. A review of how various commentators define the main issues and account for perceived shortcomings leads to the suggestion that the central challenge for social psychology is the development of an interdisciplinary theoretical account of interactive social processes.
Journal Information
Social Psychology Quarterly (SPQ) publishes theoretical and empirical papers on the link between the individual and society, including the study of the relations of individuals to one another, as well as to groups, collectivities and institutions. It also includes the study of intra-individual processes insofar as they substantially influence or are influenced by social structure and process. SPQ is genuinely interdisciplinary, publishing works by both sociologists and psychologists. Published quarterly in March, June, September and December.
Publisher Information
American Sociological Association Mission Statement: Serving Sociologists in Their Work Advancing Sociology as a Science and Profession Promoting the Contributions and Use of Sociology to Society The American Sociological Association (ASA), founded in 1905, is a non-profit membership association dedicated to advancing sociology as a scientific discipline and profession serving the public good. With over 13,200 members, ASA encompasses sociologists who are faculty members at colleges and universities, researchers, practitioners, and students. About 20 percent of the members work in government, business, or non-profit organizations. As the national organization for sociologists, the American Sociological Association, through its Executive Office, is well positioned to provide a unique set of services to its members and to promote the vitality, visibility, and diversity of the discipline. Working at the national and international levels, the Association aims to articulate policy and impleme nt programs likely to have the broadest possible impact for sociology now and in the future.
Rights & Usage
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Social Psychology Quarterly © 1980 American Sociological
Association
Request Permissions
- Access through your institution
Abstract
Critics of the laboratory experiment have maintained that artificiality (the intrusion into the experiment of “unrealistic” conditions) vitiates any possibility of generalizability beyond the confines of the laboratory. It is argued here that such artificiality in laboratory experimentation is a defect or flaw only within the context of verification and may be a distinct virtue in the context of discovery. Indeed it is argued that social psychological experiments may not be artificial enough when contrasted with the most fruitful experiments in the natural sciences. One purpose of an experiment may be to maximize artificiality deliberately so as to discover regularities that do not presently obtain under the “real” conditions outside the laboratory but which are capable of existing. When such observed laboratory regularities produce potentially beneficial outcomes, an attempt may be made to create the specific artificial laboratory conditions outside the laboratory to benefit mankind. This logic, exceedingly common in the natural sciences, has been virtually ignored in social psychology, even in the laboratory experiment, in favor of “realistic” reproduction of existing or reasonably plausible situations. Theoretical benefits of this additional modality of experimentation are illustrated by two recent developments in psychology.
Cited by (0)
Copyright © 1980 Published by Elsevier Inc.