Social Psychology Review Copyright © 2002 by 2002, Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Personality and Social Psychology Review Copyright © 2002 by 2002, Vol. 6, No. 1, 72-85 Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Social Psychology: Who We Are and What We Do Abraham Tesser and Jinn Jopp Bau Institute for Behavioral Research University of Georgia The author index of the Handbook of Social Psychology (Gilbert, Fiske & Lindzey, 1998) and of Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Processes (Higgins & Krug- lanski, 1996) served as the basis for identifying and describing some of the people constructing social psychology in the 1990s. Over 10,000 names are mentioned, but relativelyfew are mentioned several times. The 106 contributors who were mentioned mostfrequently are identified and described. They are mostly men about 20 years be- yond the PhD. The select set of institutions at which they work andfrom which they obtained their degrees are also identified. Similarities among contributors were cal- culated on the basis ofthe proximity oftheir mentions in the handbooks. An analysis of those similarities yielded eight "contributorfactors": social cognition, attitudes, motivated attribution, self, interpersonal influence, intergroup relations and stereo- types, culture and evolution, and interpersonal relationships. I have been fascinated with the subject matter and the people who they believe currently have the most in- theoretical thinking in social and personality psychol- fluence in the field. The result ofsuch a survey would be ogy since I began graduate school. Now, on the thresh- instructive. However, such an approach is expensive, old of a new millennium, it is the field of social psy- subject to distortion by subject loss, and likely to reflect chology as it currently stands that I attempt to mostly the current top-of-the-head thinking of the re- describe-because I am a psychologist, I focus on the spondent rather than a more thoughtful analysis. people that do social psychology. Who are they? Another reasonable solution would be to sample the Where are they now and where do they come from? currently available textbooks. The table of contents for What are the topics that drive their inquiry, explora- many texts, however, are formulaic and may unduly re- tion, and analysis? flect "tradition" in their coverage; in many instances A current description of the field should be com- the coverage is more superficial than might be the case prehensive, and there should be some defensible cri- in more sophisticated sources. Perhaps the ideal ap- terion for including this and excluding that. A reflex proach would be to sample the authors and content of for many of us is to take a data-driven approach-that our bestjournals. This would be timely, and the content is, to focus on something that can be counted and an- would have the appropriate depth. Regrettably, how- alyzed. In this instance, a data-driven approach may ever, such an approach would have required more re- be no more valid than a qualitative narrative. How- sources than I had for this particular project. I settled ever, it has the advantage of making many of us, my- on a compromise somewhere between the textbook ap- self included, more comfortable. proach and the journal approach. Much of what fol- Where might we find something to count that would lows is based on analysis of the author index of two re- give a good description of the field? One could collect cently published handbooks of social psychology:1 new data, perhaps a survey ofthe membership ofthe So- Handbook ofSocial Psychology2 (Gilbert et al., 1998) ciety of Personality and Social Psychology. Respon- and Social Psychology: Handbook ofBasic Principles dents couldbe asked to indicate their own research inter- (Higgins & Kruglanski, 1996). ests, the areas they consider to be most important, and The fourth edition of the Handbook of Social Psy- chology (GFL Handbook; Gilbert et al., 1998) was pub- This article is based on Abraham Tesser's presidential address to the Society for Personality and Social Psychology at the American 1Regrettably, the most recent handbook of social psychology, Psychological Association, August 2000. In keeping with that ad- The Blackwell Handbook of Social Psychology (Hewstone & dress, most of the first-person references are in the singular. Jinn Brewer, 2001) lacks a name index in one of its four volumes (Tesser Jopp Bau was responsible for the substantial data processing, partic- & Schwarz, 2001), and the analyses reported here could not be car- ularly as reflected in the section on Similarities Among Contributors. ried out on these volumes. Requests for reprints should be sent to Abraham Tesser, Institute 21 am grateful to McGraw-Hill Publishers for providing an elec- for Behavioral Research, Barrow Hall, University of Georgia, Ath- tronic version of these two indexes. Thanks also to Dan Gilbert for ens, GA 30602. E-mail: [email protected] facilitating this acquisition. 72 Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at Society for Personality and Social Psychology on May 30, 2016 SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGISTS lished in 1998 by McGraw-Hill. It was edited by Daniel of contributors falls quickly as we raise the number of T. Gilbert, Susan T. Fiske, and Gardner Lindzey and mentions. (Note that I use the word mentions as short- consists of 2 volumes and 37 chapters. The GFL Hand- hand for the number ofpages on which a person is cited book, starting with the first edition in 1935, has been a at least once.) Thus, although there are almost 6,000 standard reference work in social psychology. It is in- contributors cited on only one page of the text (5,959 to tended to cover the breadth ofthe field. I believe that the be exact), there are fewer than 1,800 (1,760 exactly) McGraw-Hill volumes are highly successful in achiev- mentioned on two pages and substantially less than ing their goals. The current edition, was, at the time of half that number cited on three different pages. Indeed, this writing, the most timely and comprehensive single the 90th percentile for mentions is somewhere between collection for serious scholarship in social psychology only four and five mentions over all 37 chapters of the that was available (see footnote 1). Moreover, the au- two-volume set. thors are recognized experts in each of their fields. This dramatic falloff in citations is nicely illustrated Any one work is likely to reflect, at least in part, idio- in Figure 1, in which the number of investigators is syncrasies associated with the editors, specific authors, plotted against the number of text pages on which they and publishers. To derive a more general picture it is were cited in the GFL Handbook. In approximate num- probably prudent to have at least one other comprehen- bers, 10,000 were mentioned on at least one page, sive description of the field from which to draw. The 4,000 were mentioned on two or more pages, 2,000 on Higgins and Kruglanski (1996) handbook, Social Psy- three or more pages, and so on. So, there are a lot of us. chology: Handbook of Basic Principles (HK Hand- However, the number of us whose contributions are book) published by Guilford Press, appeared in 1996. broad enough or important enough to be mentioned in This single-volume handbook contains 28 chapters and multiple contexts quickly drops off.4 also attempts a comprehensive view ofthe field ofsocial Who are the people that are making contributions psychology but from a different perspective. Instead of important enough to be mentioned in multiple con- an organization around areas of social psychology, this texts? To answer this question, we focused on those volume is organized around basic principals and pro- contributors whose work is mentioned on 20 or more cesses. According to the authors' preface, otherworks of pages in the two-volume GFL Handbook5 and 12 or this type focused on social psychological phenomena more pages in the single-volume HK Handbook. These and social issues. The HK Handbook "complements cutoffs are arbitrary, but they helped us develop a these by searching for specific principles underlying workable sample (n = 154 in the GFL Handbook and n many different social-psychological phenomena rather = 194 in the HK Handbook). We then compared the than focusing on the phenomena themselves" (Higgins names on each list and generated a list of all the people & Kruglanski, 1996, p. vii). Like the GFL Handbook, who are mentioned on both lists. the HK Handbook is a well-respected source work. It is Are the same top people identified in both volumes? edited and written by some ofthe field's best-known ex- The answer is yes, for the most part. Almost 70% (n = perts. Because the handbooks differ with respect to or- 106) of the 154 persons identified as being cited most ganization, editors, authors (to some extent), and pub- frequently on the GFL Handbook list are also among lisher, what is common to both volumes should give us a the most cited in the HK Handbook.6 The agreement more general view of social psychology in the closing goes beyond simply identifying the same people. Even decade of the second millennium than either volume within this highly restricted sample (e.g., 106 out of considered by itself. more than 10,000 in the GFL Handbook), there is good agreement as to the rank ordering. The correlation be- tween number of mentions in GFL and HK is .63. Who Are We? Table 1 presents the names of the 25 most fre- quently mentioned contributors (FMCs) across both The first set of questions that I address concern the people who are currently influential in the construction of our discipline. It turns out that there are a lot more 4There is a similar trend in the HK Handbook. However, because we did not have the index in electronic form, we did not attempt to people contributing to the discipline then I would have prepare a detailed plot.