psychological’ approaches from ‘typic- ally anthropological’ approaches is a delicate operation requiring a steady hand, because what we’re talking about here is differences of emphasis, not opposing approaches. Indeed, as the achievements of the pioneers who fea- ture in Figure 2.5 bear out, the early twentieth century spawned several examples of psychologists who were happy to combine experimental approaches with more naturalistic, anthropological ones.
Later trends: Cross-cultural psychology or cultural psychology?
The end of the twentieth century saw psychology and anthropology go their separate ways and psychological anthropology fall out of favour.
The study of psychology across cultures expanded and developed in several directions and along numerous pathways. The most well-worn of these paths led to the emergence of cross-cultural psychology (see Chapter 1). The publication of books and articles written from a cross- cultural viewpoint snowballed during the 1960s and 1970s. These included a manual discussing the problems of cross-cultural testing (Biesheuvel, 1969). Many of what are now regarded as ‘classic’ cross- cultural studies in the areas of cognitive (Segall et al., 1966) and devel- opmental (Dasen, 1972) psychology were conducted during this period and will be revisited in subsequent chapters. That this was a period of growing institutional acceptance for cross-cultural psychology was confirmed by the formation of several cross-cultural journals and associations, and by the invention of several accompanying acronyms:
• 1966 – IJC: International Journal of Psychology
• 1970 – JCCP: Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology
• 1972 – IACCP: International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology
• 1984 – ARIC: Association pour la recherché interculturelle.
Yet to be fully accepted into the mainstream of psychology, the cross- cultural approach still had (and has) work to do. Arguably, the reason for its continued peripheral position in most psychology undergraduate
courses is that its emphasis on cultural influence on behaviour poses a threat to the formulation of universal psychological laws (Jahoda &
Krewer, 1997). Indeed, during the 1970s some researchers with an interest in culture’s influence began to reject the core ideas behind cross-cultural psychology, which are largely based on the search for human universals (see Chapter 1).
Influenced by Vygotsky (1978) and Luria (1976), a group of researchers led by Cole (1978) decided to rethink the rationale for doing psychology across cultures. Questioning the existence of a cul- turally universal, inner core of psychological structures (psychic unity – see Chapter 1), they portrayed the human mind not as a universal, internal entity but as being inseparable from the diverse cultural con- texts we inhabit. According to this view, the mind is wide open to cultural influence and all biological and environmental influences on our devel- opment are mediated by cultural context. In short, all human behaviour is culturally mediated.
Proponents of these views set in motion a new approach to studying psychology and culture – known as cultural psychology. For cultural psychologists, culture’s role in human development (throughout history and during the life-cycle) is even more prominent than it is for cross- cultural psychologists (Berry et al., 2002). Cultural psychology is further explored in Chapter 5.
This short history of psychology across cultures has focused on its European origins, since this is where empirical psychology began. Yet in the twentieth century psychology became a global enterprise (Stevens
& Gielen, 2007), as demonstrated by an unprecedented rise in the number of international psychologists’ associations. The creation of these forums empowered psychologists from different nations to exchange ideas, work collaboratively – and of course, create acronyms:
• 1951 – IUSP: International Union of Scientific Psychology
• 1962 – ICP: International Council of Psychologists
• 1965 – IUPsyS: International Union of Psychological Science As well as the development of these international associations, another relatively recent trend has been the emergence of several psycho- logical traditions originating in diverse regions of the world, known as indigenous psychologies. Psychologists from Latin America, Africa, India and elsewhere have now come to the fore to challenge the global hegemony of US/European psychology, and to conduct re- search in response to indigenous concerns. The growth of indigenous psychologies (also known as psychological traditions within diverse
cultures) is arguably the most exciting recent development in the field of global psychology, and will be discussed in detail in Chapter 4.
Meanwhile, to ensure that you have understood the ideas contained in this overview of the history of psychology across cultures, try the reflective exercise opposite.
Summary
Chapter 2 is a potted history of psychology’s tradition of studying human behaviour in different cultures. It begins with an overview of the European philosophical ideas regarding the study of inhabitants overseas, including the demonising and romanticising in equal measure of ‘the exotic other’ by Greeks, Romans and Renaissance thinkers. More recent historical precursors of global psych- ology include investigations of behaviour and temperament that formed part of the great scientific expeditions of the nineteenth century. These adventures included Baudin’s expedition to Australia in 1799 to study ‘customs and behaviour’, and the Cambridge Anthropological Exped- ition’s pioneering field research into ‘visual acuity’ among Torres Straits Islanders in 1889.
Yet the history of global psychology is also one of racism, ethnocentrism and controversy. We read here of questionable attempts to unearth the behavioural implications of race, for example in relation to intelligence levels. More systematic, even-handed attempts to study humans across cultures are however reflected in the work of twentieth-century pioneers of both psychology and anthropology. These include investiga- tions into linguistic diversity by Francis Boas and into gender and adolescence by Margaret Mead, both of whom left their legacy in the development of psychological anthropology, whose advocates sought the link between culture and tem- perament. Coming more up to date, this chapter also plots the development of contemporary approaches to cultural issues in psychology, including the distinction between cross-cultural psychology (see Chapter 1) and cultural psychology (see Chapter 5).