Annotated Bibliography
“The Back Story of Psychology”
Barbara Lusk, Department of Psychology
Study Grant, 2009
I. Autobiographical and Biographical Series, and edited volumes
A History of Psychology in Autobiography, [insert how many volumes, what years,
and various editors]
This series has proven to be one of the most valuable resources for this study of
the “back story” of psychology. Carl Murchison began the series in America in
1930. According to Josef Brozek in his review of psychology in autobiography,
“The initial impulse to this undertaking was a letter of April 10, 1928 sent by E.
G. Boring to Carl Murchison. It grew out of Boring’s experience, while working
on his monumental A History of Experimental Psychology, that “‘it was
impossible to get important facts concerning scientific development of certain
individuals except from those individuals themselves’” (Preface to Vol. 1, A
History of Psychology in Autobiography). Following the publication of Volume 1
in 1930, Volume 2 appeared in 1932, and Volume 3 in 1936. Although Volume 3
was considered to be the last in the series, a renewed interest in the effort resulted
in the appearance of Volume 4 in 1952. It is of some interest that there was an
eighteen-year break between Volumes 8 and 9, with Volume 9 (2007, edited by
Gardner Lindzey and William M. Runyan) published as a consequence of a
chance meeting between three psychologists at a memorial service for Ernest
Hilgard. Each volume of the series includes from eight to fifteen autobiographies.
Each contributor brings his/her particular style—in writing, in perspective.
Personalities, to some extent, emerge as a consequence of what is said and left
unsaid. Although a criticism of the series is its inevitable unevenness, it is this
variety that also adds to the texture of these stories. In sum, each of these
autobiographies are mini-histories of psychology, summaries of specific theories,
and personal narratives—all with irresistible details that put flesh on the bones of
the history of the discipline.
Baker, David ((2004). Thick Description and Fine Texture: Studies in the History of
Psychology. University of Akron Press.
As editor of this excellent text, David Baker has carefully selected essays which
illuminate the nature of archival research—essentially the way “good” historians
go about their work. Contributors not only discuss the mechanics of doing
archival research, but also capture the excitement—the emotional highs and lows
that are inherent in the discovery process. Michael Sokal’s presentation of his
decades-long focus on Cattell, along with Leila ZenderIand’s account of her
struggles in developing a research focus when undertaking an analysis of the life
and work of Henry Goddard, are, quite frankly, page-turners. If rank-ordered, this
would be one of the most valuable of the resources listed on this bibliography.
II. The Psychobiographical Approach
Anderson, J. W. (2005). “The Psychobiographical Study of Psychologists.” In W. T.
Schultz (Ed.), Handbook of Psychobiography (pp. 203-209). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Anderson argues that understanding the lives of psychologists provides the
scholar with a richer understanding of the contributions of these important figures
in the development of psychological theory, the creation of psychological tests,
and the design of specific methods of psychotherapy.
Runyan, W. M. (2005). “Evolving Conceptions of Psychobiography and the Study of
Lives: Encounters With Psychoanalysis, Personality Psychology, and Historical
Science.” In W. T. Schultz, (Ed.), Handbook of Psychobiography (pp. 19-41).
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Runyan takes a rather defensive stance, arguing for the legitimacy of
psychobiography in the evolving conceptualization of scientific psychology. He
outlines the development of the discipline of psychology, noting that the study of
lives was one of the central concerns for the founders of the field, while
acknowledging that experimental psychology has now become the focus of the
discipline.
Schultz, W. T. (2005). “Introducing Psychobiography”. In W. T. Schultz, (Ed.),
Handbook of Psychobiography (pp.3-18). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schultz offers a very detailed introduction to the sub-specialty of
psychobiography, carefully defining its purpose and discussing its place in
what is considered “mainstream” psychology. To his credit, Schultz is willing to
outline what makes for both good and bad psychobiography; thus, the piece reads
less like a treatise on the virtues of the study of lives, and more like a very evenhanded account of the evolution of the specialty.
III. Psychoanalysis
Sigmund Freud:
Gay, P. (1988). Freud: A Life for Our Time. New York: W. W. Norton and
Company.
In this finely textured account, Peter Gay situates his exploration of Freud
within the social, political, cultural, and intellectual context that is necessary to
attain any reasonable understanding of the evolution of psychoanalytic theory.
Gay seems uniquely qualified as a biographer of Freud; he is not only a cultural
historian of significant reputation (Ph.D. Columbia, Sterling Professor Emeritus in
History, Yale University), but also a psychoanalytically trained “explorer” of
Freudian theory. Thus, the work reads, on occasion, as a psychobiography of
Freud. With this in mind, my only criticism is that Gay, with some selfawareness, allows himself the latitude to offer his own psychoanalytically
flavored analysis of certain details of Freud’s life. Gay’s conclusions about the
impact of these events in the development of the man and his work, although
speculative, are entertaining and provide yet another layer to this extraordinary
story of one of the most significant figures in the history of psychology.
Erik Erickson:
Friedman, L. J. (1999). Identity’s Architect: A Biography of Erik H. Erikson. New
York:
Scribner.
Considered by critics to be the most scrupulously researched of all the biographies
of Erikson, this work, at times, overwhelms with the amount of detail included.
However, the wealth of information about the life of Erikson is invaluable in
illuminating the development of his psychosocial theory. Friedman clearly
admires his subject, but maintains a noteworthy objectivity in his presentation.
His ability to connect the life of Erikson to his most noteworthy scholarly
contributions is clearly supported and never lapses into a psychological analysis.
IV. Behaviorists
John B. Watson:
Buckley, K. W. (1989). Mechanical Man: John Broadus Watson and the Beginnings
of Behaviorism. New York: The Guilford Press.
Reading Buckley’s meticulously researched and wonderfully written account of
the beginnings of behaviorism in America, with John B. Watson as the
centerpiece of the work, is both a history of the birth of psychology as a science,
as well as a psychobiography of one of the most significant figures in the
discipline. Buckley is adept at keeping himself out of the story—Watson is
enough of a story on his own. By avoiding the temptation of interpretation,
Buckley has written a manuscript that is exceptional. Watson emerges as one of
the most complex and intriguing characters in psychology.
B. F. Skinner:
Bjork, D. W. (1993). B. F. Skinner: A Life. New York: Basic Books, a Division of
HarperCollins.
B.F. Skinner is arguably one of the most influential psychologists in the history of
the discipline. D.W. Bjork, who had access to Skinner’s own multivolume
autobiography, as well as the cooperation of family, and access to the rich Skinner
archival documents at Harvard. His work is detailed and considered very accurate
by Skinner authorities. What is missing is a view of Skinner from the perspective
of the development of knowledge.
Rutherford, A. (2009). Beyond the Box: B.F. Skinner’s Technology of Behavior
from Laboratory to Life, 1950s – 1970s. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Rutherford’s extensive academic background in the history of psychology
is evident in her placing Skinner’s work in the world outside the laboratory.
Exceptionally detailed and well-organized, Rutherford book goes far beyond
simple biography by examining Skinner’s impact on popular culture.
V. Personality Theorists
Gordon Allport:
Allport, G. W. (1967). “Autobiography.” In E. G. Boring & G. Lindzey (Eds.), A
History of Psychology in Autobiography (Vol. V, pp. 3-25). New York: AppletonCentury-Crofts.
This autobiography by Gordon Allport is, in many ways, representative of the
series as a whole. The early years are briefly described, but with connections to
the development of Allport’s psychology of personality—separate from social
psychology. Allport’s insistence on the importance of the individual, and the
necessity of creating a distinct research category of personality is a recurrent
theme in this work.
Barenbaum, N. B. (2005). “Four, Two, or One? Gordon Allport and the Unique
Personality.” In W. T. Schultz (Ed.), Handbook of Psychobiography (pp. 223 – 239).
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Nicole Barenbaum, Professor of Psychology at Sewanee: the University of the
South has research interests in the history of psychology, the history of
personality psychology, and personology. This chapter in Schultz’s Handbook of
Psychobiography is one of several articles representative of Barenbaum’s
particular focus on the work of Gordon Allport. Here, Barenbaum discusses
Allport’s emphasis on the importance of the unique self, and also examines the
impact of Allport’s meeting with Freud in the development of his theory of
personality. Meticulously researched and clearly written, this chapter is an
excellent example of psychobiography at its best, with Barenbaum avoiding the
pitfall of interpreting this one episode in Allport’s life as the primary influence in
the evolution of his approach to understanding the self.
Barenbaum, N. B. (1997). “The Case(s) of Gordon Allport.” Journal of Personality,
65, 743-755.
In this article, Barenbaum uses Allport’s unpublished case study of Marion Taylor
to explore the history of Allport’s work with case studies, along with the
development of his ideas regarding the proper way to compose the life history. A
matter of some interest to historians of psychology is that Allport never conducted
a first-hand investigation of any one, other than his examination of a collection of
Letters from Jenny, done after the individual’s death.
Henry A. Murray:
Barenbaum, N. B. (2006). “Henry A. Murray: Personology as Biography, Science,
and Art.” In D. A. Dewsbury, L. T. Benjamin, Jr., & M. Wertheimer (Eds.), Portraits
of Pioneers in Psychology (Vol. VI, chapter 11). Washington, D.C: American
Psychological Association.
Barenbaum provides a very informative account of the development of Murray’s
personality psychology by focusing upon his background in hard sciences
(medical training at Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, Master’s
degree in biology at Columbia University, work at Harvard with Lawrence
Henderson, biochemist/physiologist), along with his study of ideas related to the
significance of the unconscious as represented in literature and psychoanalytic
theory. His negative response to the dominance of experimental psychology
(and to the experimentalists who dominated the psychology department at
Harvard) his status as an “outsider” at Harvard, along with his work as director of
the Harvard Psychological Clinic are included in this chapter. Barenbaum
manages to offer clearly written and enticing information—inspiring the desire for
further research.
VI. Comparative [Animal] Psychologists
Harry Harlow:
Blum, D. (2002). Love at Goon Park: Harry Harlow and the Science of Affection.
New York: Berkley Publishing Group.
This wonderfully readable account of the ground-breaking work of Harry Harlow
is one of two noteworthy books that focus on primate research by Deborah Blum,
a Pulitzer prize-winning news writer. Blum’s account of Harlow’s controversial
research on attachment formation using rhesus monkeys is as much a factual
account of the work, as it is a very clearly written history of childcare in the
United States during the early 1900s. With this historical background, Blum
skillfully sets the stage for Harlow’s scientific exploration of the effects of
separation upon attachment formation specifically, and social behavior generally.
Blum’s treatment of Harlow is remarkably even-handed; she maintains the
objectivity of a good news-writer throughout the book and does not lapse into a
psychologizing of her protagonist—a man one could easily stereotype. Her
intense interest in primate research (she refers to herself as a “primate junkie”) is
evident in her writing, which is both accurate and riveting.
VII. Social Psychologists
Stanley Milgram:
Blass, T. (2004). The Man Who Shocked the World. New York: Basic Books, a
Member of the Perseus Books Group.
Blass’s biography of Stanley Milgram places Milgram’s controversial
experiments on obedience to authority within an intellectual and social context—
essential to an understanding of the development of social psychology in the
United States. Thus, this work goes beyond a description of the life of Milgram:
his personal background, his academic pedigree, and his interest and investment
in matters related to the influence of social relations on human behavior. Instead,
the work provides a broader view of the factors affecting the reception of ideas
emerging from the work of these psychologists during the 1960s and the
ramifications of Milgram’s experiments in the years following the publication of
his findings. In general, Blass is kind to Milgram—portraying him as a
conscientious, creative scientist, more concerned with ethical issues in the
treatment of human subjects than most. Critics of this biography take issue with
Blass’s rather biased account of the obedience experiments, noting that Blass
omitted important factual data regarding subjects’ negative experiences.
VIII. Women in Psychology
Boring, Edwin G. (1951). “The Woman Problem.” American Psychologist, 6, 679682.
In dissecting the problem of women receiving less recognition/prestige than men
in professional life, Boring’s sexism shines through. “If she chooses less jobconcentration in order to be a broader person, a better wife or a better mother,
then she is perhaps choosing wisely but she is not choosing the maximal
professional success of which she would be capable.” Boring also contends that
the men who have achieved prestige in academia are more concerned with the
general than the particular. His view of women as “more concerned with the
particular” rests on Lewis Terman’s observation of this characteristic as typical of
the nature of women. Clearly, Boring’s view of the “woman problem” reflects
both biological and cultural determinism—attitudes that were commonplace in
psychology.
Johnston, Elizabeth and Johnson, Ann, (2008). “Searching for the Second Generation
of American Women Psychologists.” History of Psychology, (Vol. 11, No. 1, 40-72).
Washington, D.C., American Psychological Association.
Johnston and Johnson focus on the contributions of the generation of women
psychologists who followed the “pioneers” described by E. Scarborough and L.
Furumoto. This “second generation” includes women psychologists who received
the doctorate degree between 1906 and 1945. The authors explore the impact of
the 19th Amendment to the Constitution along with the emergence of the “New
Woman” of the 1920s on the professional lives of this group.
Pettit, Michael. (2008). “The New Woman as “‘Tied-up Dog”’: Amy E. Tanner’s
Situated Knowledges.” History of Psychology, (Vol. 11, No. 3, 145-163).
Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Pettit takes as his subject a woman who “pursued a series of ventures on the
margins of the discipline of psychology” from 1895 through the 1910s. By
discussing the professional career of Tanner, Pettit makes the point that women
who had managed to attain academic degrees from prestigious universities were
systematically denied professorships at those same institutions. Pettit refers to
Tanner’s “begging letter” to G. Stanley Hall, President of Clark University—
which was a request for a paid fellowship. Her work for Hall, her efforts at social
reform, and her stint as a debunker of spiritualism provide specific examples of
the difficulties facing women in psychology, as well as the scope of the new
psychology.
Scarborough, E. & Furumoto, L. (1989). Untold Lives: The First Generation of
American Women Psychologists. New York: Columbia University Press.
Providing a background on how “to do women’s history,” as outlined by
American historian Gerda Lerner, Elizabeth Scarborough and Laurel Furumoto
organize Untold Lives to include detailed accounts of the overlooked women in
the history of psychology, the contributions of women psychologists in historical
movements, and probably most enlightening, the reconstruction of the past as it
was experienced and understood by these women. Scarborough and Furumoto
define the “first generation” as those women who were identified as psychologists
in the first directory of scientists in the United States, American Men of Science
(Cattell 1906), and who had been accepted for membership in the American
Psychological Association by 1906. The stories of Mary Calkins, Milicent Shinn,
Ethel Puffer, Margaret Floy Washburn and Christine Ladd-Franklin are included
in Part I. Richly detailed, these accounts focus on history as experienced by these
women, with emphasis upon certain themes: the difficulty in attaining a graduate
education in psychology, the obligations and responsibilities to family, and the
terrible conflict of having to choose between marriage and career. The second
section of the book is more general, presenting the origins (ethnicity and social
class), education, life-styles, careers, and contributions of the “first generation” as
a whole. The book is both engaging and enlightening—a “must read” for anyone
interested in a more complete account of the early history of psychology.
IX. Race and Ethnicity
Winston, Andrew S. (1998). ‘“The Defects of His Race”: E. G. Boring and
Antisemitism in American Psychology, 1923-1953”. History of Psychology, Vol. 1,
No 1, 27-51. The Educational Publishing Foundation.
Winston describes E. G. Boring’s letters of recommendation written to assist
Jewish students and colleagues in their efforts to attain academic positions
following completion of their graduate work. Boring’s reputation at Harvard was
well established by 1925, as was his reputation in academia; his recommendations
held weight. These letters exemplify the common practice of identifying
candidates as Jews and evaluating their “objectionable traits”—a typical practice
which highlights the issue of anti-Semitism in the history of academic
psychology.