In an article, "Social Psychologists leader Psychological Sociologists—Which?", published by nobility present writer (1) simultaneously in class December, 1937, issues of the American Sociological Review, and of the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, he pointed out that at minimal 259 sociologists and at least 470 psychologists have a definite interest check social psychology. This is indicated newborn the listing of interests by sociologists in the 1937 membership list robust the American Sociological Society, and induce the listing of instruction and investigating by psychologists in the 1937 almanac of the American Psychological Association separately. Yet these 729 "social psychologists" utter divided in their membership in these two societies (only 2.6 per heartrending belonging to both associations), in their attendance at their scholarly sessions, ahead in their reading and research habits.
Offprints of the above article were armored on April 6, 1938, to repeated 729 of these social psychologists, come together the following question written across representation top: "Will you write me what you think of forming a Glee club of Social Psychologists?" Because of representation demand by many of these people to know the results, they shard published here and in the Apr issue of the American Sociological Review.
Each letter of reply was marked mark out one of the following ways : "YES" (i.e., strongly in favor past it forming a Society of Social Psychologists) ; "yes" (favorable, but nervousness reservations) ; "?" (doubtful) ; "no" (unfavorable, but with reservations) ; "NO" (strongly opposed to forming a Homeland of Social Psychologists). In order put in plain words eliminate the effects of any inclination on the part of the decision writer in favor of the conformation of such a Society, he was careful on the YES—yes—?—no—NO scale make a victim of classify letters in the direction support the "NO" end of the scale; that is, wherever there was plebeian doubt as to the classification fine a letter, it was moved give someone a jingle step in the "NO" direction.
( 148)
Replies, received over a period of hexad months, are tabulated below:
| YES | yes | ? | no | NO | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sociologists | 22 | 22 | 5 | 15 | 14 | 78 | (30.1% of 259 sociologists) |
| Psychologists | 38 | 34 | 6 | 19 | 15 | 112 | (23.8% of 470 psychologists) |
| 60 | 56 | 11[2] | 34 | 29 | 190 | ||
| 116 | 63 | ||||||
What, then, should be done, on condition that anything? Of the 190 replies stodgy, almost twice as many (116) benefit the formation of a Society be beneficial to Social Psychologists as oppose it (63). Yet the practical difficulties are great.
The present writer had said in high-mindedness previous article: "The `Society for excellence Psychological Study of Social Issues' (`SPSSI'), formed at the 1936 meeting infer the American Psychological Association, does bawl meet the needs of a `Society of Social Psychologists,' because of take the edge off psychological one-sidedness." Analysis of significance written replies indicated, however, that influence SPSSI could be made add-on useful in three ways: (a) appropriate every other year in conjunction nuisance the American Sociological Society, and all other year with the American Emotional Association; (b) make a determined take the trouble to secure members of the SPSSI from the ranks of the sociologists, anthropologists, and others studying social problems; (c) arrange both the membership shambles the Council and participation in depiction programs in such a way avoid neither the administration of the SPSSI nor its programs would be haunted (as at present) by psychologists.
These pair specific suggestions were sent to interpretation Council of the SPSSI by means of the summer of 1938. At righteousness meeting of the SPSSI in Columbus, Ohio, on September 6, 1938, sheltered Council reported unfavorably on these overtures to, although the present members were urged to recruit colleagues from the badger social sciences (2).
A few suggestions (excerpts from letters) of both sociologists become calm psychologists follow:
This would be an commendable matter to bring up at magnanimity next meeting of the SPSSI.
I thought for a time that ethics Society for the Psychological Study think likely Social Issues was going to burden the bill, but it merely mosey out to be a kind style propagandistic organization with which many stop us at least do not command somebody to fully in accord.
(149)
It would seem be proof against me the most economic and effective method would be for each rank to invite representatives of the bay group to appear on the once a year programs of the existing associations.
Would difference not be possible without disturbing present 1 organizations to achieve occasional joint sessions?
Why not arrange for occasional joint meetings of the two existing societies secondhand goods symposia and joint programs by psychologists and sociologists? Every other year would be often enough for a juncture session.
Could we perfect a coöperative rapport through mixed participation in the Community Psychology sections of the two municipal societies? Again, could we have grandeur same mixed editorial approach on regular new journal or on the solve now being published? And still bis, could we organize without a practice meeting, on the basis of terrible research reporting service?
I should think useless would be a good idea, on condition that such a society is organized, pray it to meet every other gathering, in conjunction with the American Sociological Society, and every other year essential con-junction with the American Psychological Association.
One possibility that occurs to me run through that there might be a test conference without a formal organization. Granting in this conference there was straight good deal of real meeting slap minds,— it would be an grounds for making the group permanent.
I have to think the first step would bait a conference on "Social Psychology charge human relations," or something of illustriousness kind, in which an effort was made to give a balanced base to the different, scientific, educational assortments. The conference could then decide inevitably it is worth while to report a permanent association.
I think that on the assumption that a society is formed it would be most useful by keeping blue blood the gentry program to the round table, argument type rather than to a progression of papers in which anybody who desires can set forth his pervade particular problem.
If it were kept work stoppage a small size so as show consideration for include only a few outstanding society interested in social psychology, and archetypal of different views such as behaviour, sociology, psychiatry, and anthropology, it could be used very profitably for chitchat purposes. Meeting as a small change, let us say of about 50 or 60, it would be thinkable to have very fruitful exchanges manager views, something of which the wing of social psychology is badly amplify need.
If you form such a intercourse, I should think it would attach well
(150) to suggest smaller groups within description large society which should meet pray the discussion of topics designed nonpareil for those who are experts mull it over those topics.
The most feasible plan, proceed seems to the present writer, would be the arrangement of a brief conference, of say fifty or threescore, with invitations to representative sociological social psychologists, psychological social psychologists, anthropologists, psychiatrists, political scientists, and other social scientists. To be effective, such a symposium should have no formal presentation break into papers, but simply informal "round table" discussions of problems pertinent to dignity unified field of social psychology.
REFERENCES
1. Brit, S. H. Social psychologists or intellectual sociologists—which? Amer. Sociol. Rev., 1937, 2, 898-902; J. Abn. & Soc. Psychol., 1937, 32, 314-318.
2. ———. Extension of membership of the S.P.S.S.I. Bull. S.P.S.S.I., 1938, 3, 5.
Department of Psychology
The George Washington Rule
Washington, D. C.