162 Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 B. Hj0fland: The Classification of Psychology

The Classification of Psychology: A Case Study in the Classification of a Knowledge Field Birger Hj0rland The Royal School of Library and Information Science, Copenhagen

Birger Hj0fLtnd is Head of Department of Science and Humanities Information Studies, Royal School of Library and Information Science in Copenhagen. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Gothenborg in 1993 in Information Science and a MA in psychology from the University of Co­ penhagen in 1974. He has been a research librarian at the Royal Library in Copenhagen 1978-1990 (subject specialist in Psychology) and the coordinator of the library's computer based reference serv­ ices.

Hj0rland, B. (1998). The Classification of Psychology: A Case Study in the Classification of a Knowledge Field. Knowledge Olganizatioll, 25(4), 162-201. 115 refs.

ABSTRACT: Different approaches to the classificnion of a knowledge field include empiristic, rationalistic, historicist, and pragmatic methods. This paper demonstrates how thesc diffcrcm methods have been applied to the classification of psychology. An etymological approach is insufficient to define the subject matter of psychology, because other terms can be used to describe thc same domain. To define the subject mattcr of psychology from the point of view of its formal establishment as a science and academic disciplinc (in Leipzig, 1879) is ;lIso insufficient because this was done in specific historical circumstances, which nar­ rowed the subject matter to physiologically-rcLncd issues. When defining the subject area of a sciemific field it is neccssary to consider how different ontological and epistemological vicws have nude their inf1uences. A subject area and the approaches by which this subject ,1rea has been studied cannot be separated from each other without tracing their mutual historical interactions. The classification of a subject field is theory-laden and thus cannot be neutral or ahistoric<11. If classific;ltion research can claim to have a mechod thac is more general than the study of the concrete developments in the single knowledge fields the key is to be found in the general epistemological theories. It is shown how basic epistemologic1l assumptions have formed the different ap­ proaches to psychology during the 20th century. The progress in the understanding of basic philosophic:tl questions is dccisive both for the development of a knowledge field and as the point of departure of classification. The theoretical principles developed in this paper are applied in a brief analysis of some concrete classification systems, including the one used by PsyclNFO / Psy­ chological Abstracts. The role of classification in modern information rctrieval is also briefly discussed.

1. Introduction tion of knowledge may be obsolete, but his name is Classification in Psycholog/ and in Libra>)' and In !o,.· worth mentioning in this article. He was the person mation Science who most often gets the credit for the formal estab­ lishing of psychology as a science because he estab­ This paper is about the classification of a specific lished the first psychological laboratory in the world subject domain: Psychology, As such it is meant to be in Leipzig in 1879. a contribution to both psychology and to library and According to Miksa this movement to classify information science (LIS or just IS).2 knowledge and the sciences died out just after the be­ As shown by Miksa (1998) there has been a philo­ ginning of the twentieth century. My own knowledge sophical and interdisciplinary "Movement to Classify confirms this. It is extremely rare that articles on the Knowledge and the Sciences" beginning in the seven­ classification of psychology or the place of psychol­ teenth century with persons like Tommaso Campan­ ogy among other fields are published. Works such as ella and Francis Bacon. During the nineteenth cen­ Braun & Baribeau (1984) or the present article are ex­ tury this movement became an activity of enormous ceptions to the rule. J What are the reasons? They proportions among a wide number of participants. "I might be a combioation of the following: a) that no­ sometimes speak of it as a time when anyone who body finds this problem of any interest any more. was anybody in the realm of scholarship wrote a trca­ This could be influenced by the fact that b) the norms tise on the topic" (Miksa, 1998, p. 34). Among the of scientific methodology have changed. This kind of persons mentioned by Miksa is also Wilhelm Wundt approach went out of fashion during the strong posi­ (1832-1920). Wundt's contribution to the classifica- tivistic trends in the beginning of the twentieth cen- Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 163 B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology

tury. c) Research has become more fragmented and sification. It is my claim that different methods of also morc applied in its orientation, which make this classification basically reflect different epistemological kind of classification research morc difficult to justify. theories as shown in Figure 1 below. A final reason could be that d) these problems appear In practice, however, classifications are often made too difficult. Nobody fecls they have the necessary without any explicit methodology; they are just based background to be able to make a contribution. on the view or horizon of the persons who are doing It is my hope that this article might contribute to the classification.6 Research libraries and information the understanding that the problems of classification systems (such as PsycINFO) often employ subject of knowledge are both important and possible to specialists to develop and update their systems or they tackle in interesting and fruitful ways. Recent interdis­ import important parts of their system from recog­ ciplinary changes in the philosophy of science (from nized handbooks and other authoritative sources. But more empiristic and rationalistic tendencies towards this is only to move the problem one step back: How more historical and holistic tendencies) also give some do you know when a given source reflects "cognitive hope for such a change. But who should do this kind authority"? How do you distinguish between good of research? Domain specialists (such as psychologists and bad proposals? In order to evaluate this you must in this case)? Library and information scientists? Soci­ develop a theory about the methodology of classify­ ologists of science?4 Philosophers? My answer is YES! Ing. They all should. Today all groups feel that this is be­ Different methods of classifying are in a very direct yond their competence. They feel that they have to way related to different epistemological theories. In­ learn too much about something that they are not sight in epistemology can thus provide us with primarily trained to do. We will all benefit if interdis­ knowledge about the merits and weaknesses of the dif­ ciplinary research in this area begins to flourish. ferent solutions. Progress in the scientific method as well as in classification (which may be seen as part of 2. On Methods of ClassificationS the scientific methodology) must be based on the his­ In Hj0rland, 1998b, I have presented a short outline torical evidence gained in epistemology and science of my theoretical view regarding the methods of clas- studies.

Figure 1 Fundamental methods of Classification

Research Objects DOCU1l1ents (E.g., Psychological phenomena) ("scientific classi- (E.g., psychological literature) fication") ("bibliographic classification")

E1l1piricistn Classification provided by statistical analysis (such Documents clustered on the basis of some kind of (Sec also as factor analysis) based on "resemblance". similarity, e.g. common terms or bibliographical appendix 1) Examples: Classification of mental illness in psy- coupling. chiatry7 or kinds of intelligence in psychology Examples: "Atlas of science" & "research fronts in based on statistical analysis of test scores. SCI", algorithms for information retrieval. Rationalism Classification based on logical divisions, e.g. classi- Facet analysis built on logical divisions and/or on (See also ap- fication of people in age groups. "eternal and unchangeable categories" pendix 2) Examples: Frame-based systems in AI; Examples: Ranganathan, BlissII & Langridge. Chomsky'S analysis of deep structure in language Semantic networks. & cognitive models of the mind in psychology

Historicism Classification based on natural development Systems based on the development of knowledge (see also Example: The theory of evolution: Biological tax- producing communities (the division of scientific section 3 in onomies labor) this paper) Example: The feature by the DDC that it distrib- utes subjects by discipline Pragmatism Classification based on the analysis of goals and Systems built on critical analysis of the deve1op- (see also sec- consequences ment and state of knowledge. tion S+6in (" critical classification ") Examples: Francis Bacon, The French Encyclopae- this paper) dists, the Marxists etc. 164 Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Figure 1 shows the relationship between basic episte� cation toward more interpretative and neopragmatic mological theories and basic methods of classifying. approaches. Classification is done in all sciences) including psy� Conclusion: A classification cannot be neutral regard­ chology8 Like any other science IS has different ap­ ing approaches or theories about its subject matter. On proaches to classification based on different epistemo­ the contrary: 77Je classification of a subject field requires a logical views. IS is mainly concerned with principles conception or view of that particular field. (This does for classifying documents produced in other disci­ not, however, imply that the problems of classifica­ plines) which imply classification on a second order tion only belong to the single disciplines and cannot level. Classification in IS is not restricted to docu­ be approached in fields like science studies or IS. ments but can be applied to all forms of "information" There may be general approaches to analyzing the represented in information systems. Different sciences subject domains, and such knowledge is not typically may influence each other. Frame-based systems and part of the knowledge of the members of specific dis­ semantic networks are examples of classifications de­ ciplines. In this paper, I shall try to show how this can veloped in Artificial Intelligence (AI) and are also ap­ be done more concretcly.)9 plied in IS. "Facet analysis" is a method of classifica­ tion developed independently in IS and in psychology. 3. A Short Outline of the Problems of In my opinion there exist a limited number of basic Defining Psychology, its Elements, methods of knowledge organization corresponding to Methods and Stmct",.e basic epistemological views. A psychiatrist can, for ex­ ample, classify mental illness using empirical methods, The term "psychology" goes back to about 1400- or rationalistic methods, or historical methods, or 1500, but it first came into common use about 100 pragmatic methods (or, of course, combinations). In years later because of the works of Christian von the same way, a psychologist can classify forms of in­ Wolff (1679-1754).10 "Psychology" is, however, just telligence or mental capacities by using statistical one term among many which have been used as a label analysis of test scores (empirical method), by using to describe the subject area, which it is meant to rep­ computer models of cognitive processes (rationalistic resent." Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) is considered to be methods), by studying the social construction of the the first person who has given a systematic description intelligence concept (historical method), or by choos­ of psychological phenomena in the book "De anima" ing a concept which fertilizes his general perspectives ("about the soul"l�. Until the establishment of psy­ and aims (pragmatic method). chology as an "independent science" in the latter part On another level, information scientists can use the of the 19th century, the study of psychological phe­ same kinds of methods to organize documents, nomena was mainly done in philosophy, but also in knowledge, or information. They can use empirical theology, in medicine, and in other fields. But what methods such as bibliometric linking and produce are the psychological phenomena?13 And what princi­ maps such as the "atlas of sciencell• They can use ra­ ples define the subject area of psychology? tionalistic methods such as developing facets or prin­ The formal establishment of psychology as a sci­ ciples for logical division, they can use historical ence was done under certain historical conditions, methods such as revealing the cultural bias in different which favored certain views and approaches of the systems, or they can select classifications which sup­ times. Psychology was first and foremost recognized port the aim of their activities. as a science because it applied the experimental method. Traditional ideals of classifying (as well as other as­ In American textbooks on the history of psychology pects of scientific methodology) have tended to be this approach, which was founded by Wundt, has of­ empiristic or rationalistic, providing "neutral" or "ob­ ten been termed "structuralism" and is said to have jective" classifications. Modern epistemology, how­ died in America with E. B. Titchener (1867-1927). It ever, emphases the theory-laden character of observa­ was replaced by "functionalism" and behaviorism and tions, as well as the theory-laden character of classifi­ other schools. This is, however, just one interpreta­ cations: They are not neutral discoveries but construc­ tion. Another interpretation says that Wundt (and in tions which favor some kind of activities at the ex­ particular his predecessors Ernest Weber, 1795-1878 pense of other activities. This important insight is to­ and Gustav Theodor Fechner, 1801-1887) founded day often associated with "post modernism" (d., psychophysics, which is a strong scientific subject Miksa, 1998), but it was already developed by the area in psychology even today (even though it was pragmatic philosophers such as John Dewey in the born with very problematic metaphysical assump­ beginning of the 20th century. It was, however, re­ tions). What remains a fact is that psychology became pressed by more empiristic and rationalistic influences splitl' by many different approaches which tend to (d. Hj0rland, 1997). This insight implies that we need define their own subject matter and classification of to move from more positivistic approaches in cIassifi- psychology. Titchener did not, for example, recognize Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 165 B. Hjorland: The Classification of Psychology

child psychology or animal psychology as partS of against an ever more obvious fragmentation. Intelli­ psychology, whereas these areas were very central in gence and its testing provided an early example of the the contemporary school "functionalism", It is impor­ discipline's tendency to annex new perception and memory. For or "system" in psychology implicates in a very strong some time, that remained the respectable core of the sense the subject matter and classification structure for discipline, but how test intelligence related to this psychology - even though this is seldom explicated core was far from clear. It was much easier to annex 15 very well. such a field institutionally that to assimilate it intel­ The formal establishment of psychology as a sci­ lectually. ence16 also raises an important question regarding the The situation was to be repeated many times over relation between "scientific psychology" as under­ in the course of the twentieth century. Child study, stood as that part of the psychological knowledge that or paedology, as it was known in some countries, was is produced inside the borders of the formally estab­ another example. Originating in joint efforrs by phy­ lished discipline, and the production of psychological sicians and educationists, it became transformed into knowledge produced outside these borders. A com­ child psychology, rapidly in the US, more slowly in mon sense consideration would say that psychological Europe. But its links to core areas of the discipline remained tenuous at best. The same could be said of knowledge is that which is produced by psychologists educational psychology, another early branch. In the (that is, the subject area and its formally educated period between the tWO world wars the discipline workforce define each other in a mutual way). This is, sprouted as many arms as Shiva, the Hindu deity. A however, a very problematic assumption, especially in psychological social psychology challenged its socio­ the case of psychology. When psychology was estab­ logical rival, "personality" and "motivation" emerged lished as a formal discipline about 1879 this was done as semi-autonomous fields of research and teaching, on what must today17 be considered a very limited industrial psychology flourished, clinical psychology approach compared to the huge amount of psycho­ became a reality. logical knowledge produced in philosophy, theology, What link was there between these fields, except biology, medicine, and also outside the academic that they all claimed to be "psychological"? But did world. that mean anything beyond a vague sense of common focus lhat was based on popular images rather than In the process of its development psychology not on solid scientific grounds? Grouping these diverse only questioned its own foundation and established areas together as branches of one discipline undoubt­ new different - and often conflicting - approaches. It edly had certain practical advantages. It advanced the also began to absorb (and perhaps to monopolize) Cpsychoanalysis in the post-war pe­ time in the future. Why should anyone accept these riod played a significant role in establishing a link be­ notes, and, more importantly, how could psycholo­ tween the subject of psychology and the exploration gists justify such promises to themselves? of individual motives. In the subsequent academic lit­ erature on the topic of motivation Freud is always In the period under consideration here [second to mentioned as a motivational theorist, if only to repu­ fourth decades of the 20th century], that justification diate his theories as unscientific. Among other things, depended to a very large extent on the notion that, ul­ the construction of the new field of motivation en­ timately, Psychology was one discipline whose vari­ abled academic psychology to extend its dominion to ous branches would turn out to be linked by one set topics that psychoanalysis had put on the applied psychology be­ would need to be tied together by common categories came parts of the overall discipline of psychology: of discourse. Such common categories would establish the claim that there were indeed phenomena of im­ The story of twenty-century academic Psychology is portance that were common to all fields of Psychol- the story of an ultimately unsuccessful struggle 166 Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

ogy. Then one could study these common phenom­ (and SlIbdisciplines), scientific categories, subject areas, ena in order to discover rhe principles that unified the and approaches (or schools/systems/paradigms) as IInits discipline. Jor classification. This was the role played by the categories of "be­ We have seen how the concept oj discipline illumi­ haviour" and "learning" in the history of twentieth­ nates the influences of the formal establishment and century American Psychology.19 Of the two� "behav­ institutionalizing of a subject area. The division of iour" was more foundational, for it became the cate­ gory that the discipline used to define its subject mat­ academic labor in society has an influence on which ter. ... subject areas are included and also the theoretical and The history of "behaviour" is not only inter­ methodological approach towards those subject ar­ twisted with the history of "learning", it is also deeply eas.2l We have also learned that disciplines can con­ entangled with the history of behaviorism. Unlike the tinue to exist and grow even if the criteria that played other categories considered here, it has the unique dis­ the decisive role in their establishment are later aban­ tinction of having given its name to a movement. That doned. They seem to follow a principle which All­ leads (Q certain difficulties. We have to be careful not port (1937) called "functional autonomy". to confuse the history of the movement with the his­ Psychological areaS or sllbdisciplines are, for example, tory of the category. They are far from being the psychological processes within organisms (such as same . ... (Danziger, 1997, 85-86) perception, learning, memory, emotions and motiva­ The main thesis in Danziger's book (1997, p. 17) is tion), developmental psychology, the psychology of that until the second half of the 20th century there personality, social psychology, and applied psycholo­ was not one but several disciplinary languages of psy­ gies (e.g., clinical psychology, educational psychol­ chology [including categories of psychology and im­ ogy, industrial- and organizational psychology etc.). plying implicit classifications of the discipline], and Such areas can be seen as the object studied by special­ each of them had its own historical trajectory. In the ized groups of people in the discipline, and in this re­ aftermath of World War II, however, the language of spect they exist a priori to different approaches and American Psychology was adopted virtually every­ theories. On the other hand, as science develops, areas where, a situation that has only begun to change re­ and approaches studying these areas become more cently. The period between 1910 and 1940 was a time connected. In the case of psychology many subject ar­ of revolutionary change, not because the theories that eas existed before the science was formally estab­ explained the phenomena were changed, but because lished, and in the history of its development, these the phenomena themselves changed. They changed preexisting fields influenced the scientific approach because the categories that defined them changed. just as principles and methods developed in the scien­ A striking feature of the discipline in its American tific organization influenced the subject areas. incarnation was the impressive degree of uniformity Psychological approaches (or movements, views, achieved in its discourse - at least for a time. If one schools, paradigms, currents, etc') are the theories, basic were to give a name to this hegemonic form of dis­ forms of understanding, or ideas (ideologies), which course one would have to call it "behavioral". This have influenced the development of psychology. does not mean that most American psychologists They have designed the categories as well as the theo­ were behaviorists, a judgment about their explicit ries and the concrete knowledge, which is established theoretical commitments. Whatever those commit­ inside and outside the discipline. Examples are behav­ ments might have been, most of them were quite iorism, cognitivism, psychoanalysis, humanism, and ready to use the specialized terms of their discipline in the historical�cultural approach (see also appendix 3). a manner that conceded many of the assumptions of According to Kuhn's (1970) theory of scientific revo­ behaviorism and made them invisible. lutions scientists organize themselves around such In chapter ten Danziger raises the question of paradigms. Kuhn differentiated between pre-scientific whether psychological categories can be said to consti­ phases or stages, normal or paradigmatic phases, revo� tute "natural kinds", whether they mirror the struc­ lutionary phases, new paradigmatic phases and so on. ture of a psychological reality that exists independ­ Real science is characterized by normal phases in ently of them. After considering the social contextu­ which there is almost total consensus concerning the alization of these categories and their referential role, discipline's fundamental approach. It is a question of that question is ultimately answered in the negative.20 interpretation whether Danziger's demonstration of the generality of a soft behaviorist approach in psy­ What have we learned from the above cited con­ chology could be said to represent normal science. I cerning the classification of psychology? First oj ail, would say no. However, a closer discussion would we have learned that it is very important to make a dis­ have to include a much more careful analysis of tinction between different kinds of concepts. We must Kuhn's theory and newer related works in the phi­ analytically distingllish between the concept oj discipline losophy of science. Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 167 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Psychologicctl categories are the terms that a disci­ Figure 2 illustrates the possibility of analyzing each pline (or a given approach) regards as its fundamental subject area in psychology from the point of view of concepts. In psychology this is, for example, cogni­ each theoretical approach (and vice versa), In a given tion, emotion, learning, personality, attitude, intelli­ field (say developmental psychology) it is possible to gence, etc. Danziger (1997) shows that around half of trace the influence of behaviorism, of psychoanalysis, the fundamental concepts in psychology afe con­ of cognitivism, of humanistic psychology, of activity structed in the twentieth century. The rest originate theory, and so on, Sometimes such a mapping will be from the philosophy of earlier periods. Danziger also easy, sometimes difficult. Psychoanalysis concentrates shows that a psychology oriented towards the Dat ural on personality, motivation, and emotions. Psycho� sciences tends to conceive psychological phenomena analysis is sometimes said not to be about cognitive as "natural kinds", whereas modern constructivistic processes. But it is possible to write books about the approaches tend to conceive them as historical prod­ psychoanalytic view on cognition, and it has been ucts, as "human kinds". done. Each theoretical system favors some subject ar­ There is a Vel)' complicated interaction between the eas and neglects others. Even if nothing has been said developments of (sllbJdisciplines, categories, and ap· directly about a given connection between an ap� proaches in the hist01Y of psychology. I have already in­ proach and an area, it is possible to generalize some dicated that each approach in a very fundamental way principles and to draw some conclusions about these establishes its own subject matter, In my opinion, the connections. analysis of the systems of the sciences must start by It is, however, important to realize that Figure 2 is uncovering the most basic philosophical and theoreti� only a purely analytical table. The table gives the im­ cal assumptions and hence identifying the basic ap­ pression, that these connections can be analyzed as proaches or paradigms at the interdisciplinary level as purely external relationships. In reality (as docu� well as at the disciplinary level. I find the "social con� mented in the history of psychology) there are strong structivistic" method applied by Danziger and others internal connections between a given approach and its absolutely necessary, but that docs not mean that I am subject matter. It is also important to recognize the in­ not a scientific realist. We should start our analysis teractive character of these relationships. Develop­ with the examination of the fundamental approaches, mental psychology is not only some psychological ap� but it would be relativistic to think that one approach proach used in the study of the psychology of chil­ is as good as any other. Reality puts limits to which dren. Child psychologists are studying a reality (some­ approaches can survive in the long run and is a deter� thing that develops), and this tends to influence their mining part in the development of knowledge (maybe thinking and theories in a way which makes it more to a lesser degree in the social sciences compared to unlikely to develop "static" theories in this field. This the natural sciences), However, the kind of "realism" again implicates that knowledge domains tend to be found in empiricism where it is supposed that science characterized both by the phenomena that are studied can uncover reality from observations alone, disrc� and the approach which is used to study those phe� garding history and theories, I find very na'ive and nomena. This again implicates that the methods of dangerous, psychology are not primarily an independent subdis­ cipline, but is primarily part of all subdisciplines22. Figure 2 Connections between Approaches and Areas of Knowledge in Psychology Behaviorism Cognitivism Psycho- Phenomeno- Gestalt- Activity etc dynamics logical Psy- psychology theory chology Processes in organisms I (perception, memory... ) Developmental Psychology Psychology of personality Social PsycholoKY Applied Psychologies (clinical, educational ...) etc. 168 Know!. Org. 2S(1998)NoA B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

OUf overall conclusion on this section three is that Figure 3 Connections between Theories in in defining psychology, its elements, methods and Psychology and Epistemology structure the basic theoretical approaches (or para­ digms) must be taken as the point of departure. You can of course classify psychology by using purely em­ Basic Philosophical Basic Psychological pirical or rationalistic methods on a given set of psy­ Position Approach chological data (including bibliographical data or liter­ ary data). However, the historical development of psychology demonstrates the limitations of these ap­ Empiricism/ Behaviorism; proaches. Just to argue whether one set of data is use­ logical positivism connectlOlllsm ful or sufficient for an empirical or rational analysis Rationalism Cognitivism; presupposes that you usc criteria which must in the Systems theory end be justified by theoretical criteria of what consti­ tutes psychological knowledge. There is no escape Hermeneutics/ Humanistic psychology. from deep theoretical involvement. The question is phenomenology Psychoanalytic symbolic what kind of methodological approach can be applied interpretation to uncover the basic classificatory structure? And can such a methodological approach be of a certain gener­ Scientific Realism & Pragmatic/functionalistic ality so that it can be used to study the classification of Historical Materialism psychology other disciplines as well? My working hypothesis is Cultural-historical that an epistemological approach is one necessary psychology/ element in classification research and that it may ful­ Activity theory fill the requirements of being sufficiently general.2J Skepticism "Post modern psychology" 4. The Epistemological Basis of Psychological Etc. Etc. Theories Behaviorism, cognitlVlSm, psychoanalysis, actIvity There is a close relationship between psychological theory, etc., are different approaches or theories to the approaches such as behaviorism, cognitivism, and psy­ same phenomenon: the human mind.24 Each of these choanalysis on the one side, and epistemological theo­ theories implies its own subject matter for psychology ries such as empiricism, rationalism or histori­ and hence its own conceptual system and classifica­ cism/hermeneutics on the other. This is described in tion. Behaviorism is a psychological approach (much most of the traditional histories of the field. It is, related to empiricism), which implies that the subject however, often assumed that this link is cut when a matter of psychology is behavior, learning, responses, science breaks loose from philosophy. The connection discrimination, and so on. Cognitivism (related to ra­ between a science and philosophy is itself an epistemo­ tionalism) is an approach that implies that the subject logical question where more positivistic theories em­ matter of psychology is information processing of the phasize the independence of the sciences, whereas mind, short- and long-term memory, attention, top­ more hermeneutic theories emphasize the connection down and bottom-up perceptual processes. Humanistic between the sciences and their often implicit assump­ psychology (related to hermeneutics) is a non­ tions in ontology and epistemology. deterministic psychology emphasizing the understand­ It is my thesis and claim that not only the study of ing of persons by means of humanistic methods. The psychological theories should be done from an epis­ subject matter of psychology is seen as the analysis of temological point of departure, but also that all classi­ concrete personalities as well as human goals, ambi­ fication research should do so. This claim must of tions and choices. The most extreme form of human­ course be defended, and the relevant contra-arguments istic psychology represents existential psychology (re­ must be considered. However, this is my present ap­ lated to philosophical existentialism) where people are proach, and the consequence of rejecting this claim is seen as responsible for their own existence. The basic to give up this approach to a theory of classifying sub­ choice for human beings is the choice between suicide ject domains. If no better approach to classification or continuing to live. If people choose not to commit can be provided, this is a very serious problem for LIS. suicide, the next choice is whether to choose your Therefore this claim must be considered carefully. own life or just to follow the pattern put forward by In Figure 3 is shown a simple table of connections external circumstances. Psychoanalysis (related to her­ between psychological approaches and their main meneutics - at least in some interpretations) is an ap­ epistemological assumptions. proach that implies that the subject matter of psy­ chology is dreams, neurosis, unconscious processes, Know!. Org. 25(1998)NoA 169 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology and symbol analysis. ClIllllral·bistorical psycbology/ tendencies of European philosophy in the period after activity themy (related to pragmatism and scientific re­ Scholasticism and prior to Kant. alism) implies that the subject matter of psychology is Empiricism saw people as born without any human adaptation to various physical, biological, and knowledge ("tabula rasa"), and all the knowledge an cultural conditions, that is how languages and cultures individual obtained came from the senses. Users form form human psychological capacities, processes, and simple concepts from simple sense impressions. By the personalities. laws of association more complex concepts could be Some psychological approaches arc easier to ana­ formed in the individual. Experiences must always be lyze from an epistemological point of view than other fragmentary and private. approaches arc. Behaviorism is an example of a rela­ The 20th century has been dominated by empiricist tively easy approach because it is so clearly related to philosophy, especially by logical empiricism and logi­ empiricism and logical positivism. Psychoanalysis is cal positivism from about 1920 up to 1950. In psy­ much more difficult. Because my suggested approach chology this view has especially been carried on in be­ depends on whether it is in fact possible to analyze all haviorism, which dominated American psychology the most important approaches, I should be able to from 1913 to about 1965. This view has more recently identify the epistemological basis also of psychoanaly­ influenced "cognitive science" in theories about neural sis. Andkjaer Olsen & K0ppe (1996) regard psycho. networks and "connectionism". analysis as something new, which is irreducible to Rationalism, on the other hand, saw sense experi­ both mechanicism and humanism. Schultz (1988) re­ ences as a limited way to obtain knowledge. In order gards Freud as the Hero of psychology, but finds that to perceive something, a person must already have a the problem with psychoanalysis is that it is not built certain psychological makeup, which permits her to on a realistic theory of knowledge. In appendix 4 I interpret the sense data. A person must have some have provided a classification of psychoanalytic ap­ concepts and these concepts cannot come from the proaches based on Andkj",r Olsen & K0ppe (1996). I senses but must be inborn (or they must develop from find it useful in itself (it could, for example, be applied some pre-form, which is inborn). In modern terms: in the PsyclNFO-database). But I also think that it The brain must run some programs or follow some confirms the hypothesis about the basic role of epis­ rules which determinate the fate of all input and the temology in analyzing psychological theorics.25 actions of the individual. Maybe the most problematic aspect of establishing With the computer revolution came a new rational­ psychology as "an independent science" was the ten­ ist trend which dominated in the 1970s and 1980s. In dency to neglect philosophical studies, to regard them psychology it dominated "the cognitive revolution" as obsolete and to concentrate too much on cumulat­ starting about 1956 with the psychologist Jerome ing empirical facts. All empirical research depends on Bruner and the linguist Noam Chomsky dominating the theoretical outlook of the researchers, and in the psychology from about 1965 and culminating about case of psychology a very broad theoreticaL historical 1985. It was closely connected to research in "artificial and cultural outlook is necessary. The different ap­ intelligence" and to the interdisciplinary field known proaches in psychology reflect the researchers' out­ as "the cognitive sciences". Today there is a re­ look, and these outlooks tend to reflect - more or less evaluation and discussion about the status of this in­ unconsciously and contradictorily - the theories of terdisciplinary trend (see Johnson & Ernding, 1997), knowledge. In my opinion, we can come a long way and many people find its epistemological assumptions in the understanding of psychology by analyzing this very problematic. discipline from theories such as empiricism, rational­ Historicism is a philosophy that emphasises that ism, and historicism, even if this classification is a perception and thinking are always influenced by our crude one. language, culture, by our preunderstanding and "hori� Empiricism is a philosophy that favors perception zon", including our scientific theories. Historicism has and experiences. It arose, in part, together with ra­ a strong connection to the humanities where herme­ tionalism from different ways of drawing epistemo­ neutics has been dominating for centuries. As a theory logical and methodological lessons from the ongoing of science historicism has especially evolved as scien· progress of the scientific revolution inaugurated by tific realism, which is an evolutionary epistemology Copernicus and consummated by Newton. Where developed within American pragmatism (by Charles empiricism favors observation, rationalism has the Sanders Peirce) and within historical materialism (by opposite tendency and is thus a philosophy that places Friedrich Engels) in the 19th century. less relative emphasis on sensory experience and more Historicism thus agrees with rationalism in the on reasoning and a priori theorizing. Together, ra­ view that our experiences arc determined by our psy­ tionalism and empiricism constitute the two main chological make-up. However, it does not see this make-up as something inborn or common for all hu- 170 Know!. Org. 25(1998)NoA B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology man beings, but rather as determined by cultural fac­ Also in the development of psychology persons tors. Cognitivism compares the human mind with a such as Ernest Weber (1795-1878), Gustav Theodor computer and tries to explain logical thinking, the Fechner (1801-1887), and Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920) working of the memory and decision making as gov­ founded psychology (or rather psychophysics) on the erned by rules which can be uncovered and used in basis of metaphysical assumptions inspired by relig­ systems with "artificial intelligence". Historicism, ious beliefs, and not by the wish to produce practical however, understands psychological mechanisms as knowledge (at least not primarily). Weber, Fechner & culture-determined. "Logical thinking" in "developed Wundt worked under metaphysical assumptions from countries" is opposed to "wild thinking" in "primitive the dualistic tradition of Descartes, in which the hu­ cultures". One explanation is that the development of man mind is something totally different from the written language changed the cognitive functions. In physical world. In fact the fathcrs of psychophysics cultures with written languages it is possible to com­ were much inspired by the hope that their research pare the formal structure of sentences, whereby for­ could prove materialism wrong and provide a basis for mal rules of logical thinking can be formulated and religious beliefs. In spite of such problematic meta­ taught. Even members of a literate culture who have physical assumptions, they succeeded in discovering not had courses in formal logic will be affected by this some very important methods, laws and principlq for ncw way of thinking (Goody, 1987). Such a way of psychology. explaining logical thinking is very different from a That fact that problematic metaphysical assump­ cognitivist's assumptions. In this way the psychologist tions many times in the history of science have led to Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934) sees higher cognitivc func­ important scientific discoveries does not, however, tions such as memory as determined by culture. mean that metaphysical assumptions do not matter. Primitive societies think more in pictures, where de­ Indeed, such assumptions are very important because veloped societies have a more verbal functioning of they are the glasses through which scientists look at memory. The memory of small children is working the world. Such glasses can be more or less helpful or by biological principles, but with the learning of a harmful. One of the very important functions of such language memory begins to be working on a new religious beliefs has been that they allowed scientists higher level determined by sociocultural factors. This to spend much time and energy on attacking problems cognitive theory was already developed around 1930, without any substantiation for practical relevance. A but only today (in the 1990s) it seems to represent a related function has been the search for beauty, which main stream in American and international psychol­ resulting in, for example, mathematically formulated ogy. laws. In the philosophy of science historicism has been The pragmatic and functionalistic understanding of influential in the work of Thomas Kuhn (1970). His human psychology can be traced to evolutionary bi­ theory about scientific "paradigms" reflects how the ology and Darwinism. This understanding is very dif­ processing of information by scientific knowledge­ ferent from dualism, which views the spirit as some­ producers (and users) is determined by more or less thing different from the material world. Pragmatism conscious assumptions.26 Kuhn's theory bridges the understands human psychological processes and struc­ individual and the collective level in cognitive proc­ tures as parts of the adaptations of living organisms to esses. In the 1990'ties, historicism seems to become a life on eanh. Perception, memory, emotions, intelli­ dominant epistemology. There are several different gence, motivations and so on are products of three in­ schools working under the broad headline of histori­ terwoven lines of development: biological develop­ cism, for example, hermeneutics, pragmatism, social ment (phylogenesis), cultural development (anthropo­ constructivism, semiotics, and activity theory!the cul­ genesis) and individual development (ontogenesis). tural-historical school. It is beyond the scope of this Pragmatism/functionalism tries to understand how article to bring an introduction to each of these. human psychological phenomena can be understood and explained as adaptations to the environments in S. The Pragmatic Understanding of Knowledge their development. Production A pragmatic understanding 0/ psychology is not iden­ tical with the understanding 0/ psychology as an applied The sciences did not arise as responses to the prac­ scienceY Applied science takes its point of departure tical needs of human beings. Rather the sciences arose from some formulated problems, for example, the se­ in ancient history as activities connected to religious lection of exceptional students for special education or beliefs. Only with the Enlightenment (from about the effectiveness of different methods of treatment of 1680) the belief in progress in society depending on mental diseases. Basic or fu ndamental science however, the development of the sciences became a dominant takes as its point of departure some problems formu­ VIew. lated by scientists themselves, and for which there Know!. Q'g. 25(!998)No.4 171 B. I-Ijmiand: The Classification of Psychology

need not exist any practical utility at that moment. cation of psychological knowledge. With the intro­ Basic science in psychology asks questions such as: duction of pragmatism and functionalism came a what afe the nature and cause of different perceptual much more fruitful exchange between theory and illusions? How many functional memory systems ex­ practice. Also psychoanalysis is known for its very ist in man (e.g., long�term memory and short-term close relations between theory and practice) basic and memory)? To what degree are human mental abilities applied research. inborn, and what can twin-studies tell us about this? "Applied psychology" (for example in pastoral care) What determines the development of the individual can be traced far back in the history of mankind, long personality? Psychologists who afC oriented towards before the formal establishment of psychology as an pragmatic epistemology can thus be either applied sci­ independent science. According to Danziger (1997) p. entists or basic scientists or both. 85), the newly established discipline of psychology be­ The connection between basic and applied science gan to annex these areas (for example child study and is all but trivial in the development of psychology. In educational psychology) without being able to assimi· the history and philosophy of psychology there has late them theoretically. Thus the semantic connection been some interest in the philosophy of applied sci" between terms that designate subject areas can be ence (see among others Danziger) 1990 and 1997; more or less theoretically justified or can just repre­ Brocke, 1980; Hoffman & Deffenbacher, 1994; and sent a kind of disciplinary imperialism. Schonpflug, 1993). Danziger (1990, p. 120 + 126) Applied perspectives can contribute with valuable writes: perspectives to the development of a knowledge field. However, applied orientations in knowledge produc­ "For the very term "applied psychology" reflected the myth that what psychologists put to use outside uni­ tion do also have their great disadvantages. It is a fact versities was based on a genuine science, much as en­ in the history of science, that basic science has had gineers based themselves on physics. [Note 6: "The tremendous practical consequences. The real and deep notion that technological change was due to the ap­ understanding of the nature of the mechanisms under· plication of science was part of the popular rhetoric lying phenomena is often much more valuable than of science at the time, and psychologists were able to the more superficial attempts to understand phenom­ deploy it effectively because it was such a pervasive il­ ena in the frame of some practical problems. It is) for lusion... "]. example) better to understand the growth of the nor· ...p. 126}: "If we distinguish between the research mal cell and the cancer cell than just to try one cure published in the applied journals and tholt published after another. Also the classification of phenomena in in the basic journals, it is clear that during the inter­ the sciences according to deep theoretical principles war period it was only the latter group that W,IS un­ dergoing something like a revolutionary develop­ (as) e.g.) in biological taxonomies) is in the larger per­ ment. The pattern for applied-research styles had spective much more economical than just to classify been essentially established at the end of World War according to narrow practical purposes (as) e.g.) in I, and in the ensuing years no fundamental changes domestic animals) pets) and pests). It is important that occurred. This was basically a Galronian style of re­ science can grow according to scientific needs (how search concentrating on the distribution of psycho­ they should be described may be difficult, but that is logical characteristics in natural or psychometrically another matter). If science is too much controlled by constituted populations. Thus, by this time there external factors, there is a real danger that knowledge were two quite divergent styles of psychological re­ will not accumulate) that skepticism will flourish and search in existence. One worked with data from indi­ that knowledge will become fragmented and disorgan· vidual subjects reacting under laboratory conditions, ized. In this way the problem of the classification of the other with popul-ations surveyed statistically. The knowledge is connected to questions regarding the one had the weight of tradition and the mystique of the laboratory behind it, the other was buoyed up by working conditions of researchers and the relations apparent practical success and immediate social rele­ between researchers and the rest of society. vance" Therefore a pragmatic perspective should not only understand its phenomena in a broad perspective em" The development of psychological knowledge IS phasizing the understanding of the phenomena in not only monodirectional from basic science over ap· their development and their mutual relationship with plied science to practical applications) but also in the their environments. A pragmatic understanding opposite direction. Some approaches to basic research should also emphasize the interaction between the in psychology are more open to applied concerns than phenomena and science itself. Science should be reflec· other approaches are. Wundt's psychology and the so­ tive and consider its own history . Understand how called "structuralistic" approach in American psy" different motives and interests in science tend to give chology were relatively uninterested in applied psy­ priority to certain ways at looking of the phenomena) chology and were also rather unfruitful for the appli- and to analyze how scientific concepts) theories) 172 Know!. Org. 25(1998)NoA B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology

methods, institutions and so on can or do represent LIS is the field where most explicit interests in and "social constructions". analyses of the problems of classification of knowl­ A pragmatic approach to psychology is thus an ap­ edge fields are taking place. proach which emphasizes the development of psycho­ Another group of users of classification are pub­ logical phenomena as adaptations to the environments lishers of great handbooks in specific disciplines (this of organisms and persons. It also examines the motives is especially a German tradition, see appendix 5). In a behind psychological theories, concepts and ap­ more fundamental way, however, the basic organiza­ proaches. It asks: "What practical difference does it tion of knowledge reveals itself in the way disciplines make whether this theory is correct?" It tries to de­ are organized in universities and similar institutions velop knowledge that is at the same time relevant for for the production and teaching of knowledge and in human activities and represents deep structures of re­ the structure of scientific publications (especially ality. There is no conflict between a pragmatic view journals). The way the scientific journals classify new and a realistic view. On the contrary: a realistic epis­ knowledge in their selection criteria and in their mu­ temology must be based on pragmatism (pragmatic re� tual delimitation reflects a basic structure of classifica­ alism). tion. This structure is, however, not explicit, but can be more or less known by researchers and by informa­ 6. The Pragmatic Understanding of Classification tion specialists or can be analyzed by empirical stud� ies. It should also be clear, however, that this more or Just as a pragmatic view of science (e.g., of psychol� less hidden structure reOects many agents' different ogy) is different from an applied view, so is a prag� needs, and is rather a representation of the producers' matic view of classification different from a view of needs and possibilities than a representation that the applications or concrete purposes of classification. would satisfy the needs of users and information seek­ The pragmatic understanding of classification con� ers. It is important to realize that the needs of differ­ ceives a classification as a tool, and as such more suited ent agents can be in conflict, and that a classification to some purposes, goals and interests than to other has to consider what kind of needs it is going to fulfill. purposes. A classification is never neutral, but reflects Just as applied science tends to make knowledge - consciously or unconsciously - certain values and production less deep, less coherent and less well organ­ views of the thing classified and the use of the classifi� ized compared to basic science, applied classifications cation itself. According to John Dewey a classification can be marked by some local or accidental factors is objective in the sense that there exist objective stan� which blur its deeper structure. Classification research dards for its goodness: should provide a basic approach to classification, Nevertheless there is a genuine objective standard for which can then be modified in different specific appli­ the goodness of special classifications. One will fur­ cations. ther the cabinetmaker in reaching his end while an­ LIS has been interested in both universal classifica­ other will hamper him. One classification will assist tions covering all knowledge fields and in specific clas­ the botanist in carrying on fruitfully his work of in­ sifications covering a single field of knowledge. Both quiry, and another will retard and confuse him. The kinds of systems do have their justification. However, teleological theory of classification does not therefore commit us to the notion that classes are purely verbal when users seek information about some specific mat� or purely mental. Organization is no more merely ter, the disciplinary systems are most suited to their nominal or mental in any art, including the art of in­ needs because they can display the knowledge field quiry, than it is in a department store or railway sys­ from a specific point of view without making com� tem. The necessity of execution supplies objective cri­ promises regarding how other disciplines would like teria. Things have to be sorted out and arranged so their subjects represented. Ovesen (1989) describes that their grouping will promote successful action for how the discipline of anthropology almost disappears ends. Convenience, economy and efficiency are the in the Danish Dewey System (DKS) because almost all bases of classification, but these things are not re­ anthropological subjects in his view are placed under stricted to verbal communication with others or to subject headings which are names of other disciplines inner consciousness; they concern objective action. Oike sociology). A universal classification always has They must take effect in the world. (Dewey, 1948, pp. 151-154) to make compromises and to decide whose interests should primarily be taken care of. In doing so, it is of Applications of classifications are manifold. Library interest to know how each discipline would like to and information science is especially interested in clas­ represent its field of knowledge. Therefore, I find that sifications as tools for information retrieval in data­ disciplinary classifications - the subject of this article bases, for the organization of information in libraries - are of primary interest both for subject specialists and bibliographies, in short, as a tool for supporting and for LIS. I also see a need for general classifications, · the information seeking activities of staff and users. but this is beyond the scope of this article to discuss. Know!. Org. 2S(1998)NoA 173 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Regarded as a tool for information retrieval classifi* Research on the classification of psychology should cations have to compete with many other ways of ac­ thus include research in issues such as: cessing information. Today we have a lot of opportu­ - Is "General psychology" a subdiscipline of psychol­ nities such as searching in titles, abstracts, fulltext, ci­ ogy? tations and so on. A theory of information retrieval - Are both a sociological and a psychological "social should be able to specify the relative strengths and psychology" an empirical reality? Whether or not limitations of each subject point in retrieving informa­ this is the case, one should further ask: "Should tion. Thus also to specify the relative strengths and there exist two or more social psychologies?!! (pro­ limitations of classification codes in relation to all the viding arguments pro et can and a conclusion, This other possibilities. conclusion could later be changed by new evi­ Seen in this way, a classification of a subject do­ dence). main in a bibliographical record is represented by a - What are the relations between ethology and (ani­ symbol which can be used in identifying relevant in­ mal) psychology? formation. Behind this symbol exists a whole classifi­ - What are the relations between psychiatry and cation scheme that structures the subject domain in clinical psychology? one specific way. - To what degree is research in specific fields (e.g., In a way we have more than one classification in a child development) interdisciplinary? database and represented in each record. Descriptors - And so on (from thesauri) are also a kind of symbols from a clas­ sification (and combinations also exist). What this ar­ Classification research should analyze concrete ticle is about is the more traditional kinds of classifica­ domains as well as relationships between domains and tions which provide an overall mapping of the knowl­ similar patterns across different domains. Such issues edge field in a top down fashion dividing the subject are difficult and cannot be expected to be answered domain in a number of classes, which are then subdi­ once and for all. If classification research does take it­ vided and so on. This is not the most important form self seriously as research it tries to illuminate such for information retrieval, but it is one form among problems without jumping to too fast conclusions, others, and it does have certain useful functions (se Practical classifications should be made all the time also Hj0rland, 1998a+c). building on the accumulated knowledge at the time of I will conclude this section by stating that from the construction (and should be evaluated on that back­ pragmatic point of view proposals for the classifica­ ground). The essential result of research in classifica­ tion of psychology should be evaluated by the follow­ tion should not as much be seen as concrete classifica­ ing criteria: tions as a repertoire of arguments for and against dif­ ferent ways of classifying different subject domains. - A psychological classification should represent all Classification research should build on a realist the most important approaches and subdisciplines epistemology and should never be regarded as fin­ in psychology (based on empirical, rationalistic, ished. Real breakthroughs in the classification of the historical, and pragmatic evidence). A classification sciences are rare (e.g., Linne's botanical system, the is expected to identify, label and systematize the atomic system of Rutherford and Bohr and recent main production of knowledge. changes in biological taxonomies) and are connected - A psychological classification should reflect an un­ with theoretical breakthroughs in the sciences. Classi­ derstanding of the history of the discipline, its dif­ fications are, however, not only a result of research in ferent approaches, areas and perspectives. the single sciences. Research in classification can also - A psychological classification should be explicit stimulate scientific development. The specific sciences about the view on psychology on which it is based. are not independent of philosophy or of knowledge - A psychological classification should reflect theo­ about and views on classification, retical views on the connection between psychol­ ogy and other sciences 7. Some Concrete Psychological Classifications - A psychological classification should reflect theo­ retical views on the connection between different In the appendixes to this paper are shown some subclasses/subdisciplines of psychology specific classifications for psychology ,29 - A psychological classification should avoid the re­ Two dispositions by major German "Handbiicher" duction of psychology to either biology or sociol­ (Graumann et aI., 1981-; Balmer et aI., 1976-1981) ogy (Appendix 4) - A psychological classification should - if possible - - The one used in PsycINFO (a database with more be based on a theory about the object of psychol­ than 1.500.000 records by 1998) in 1998 and 1986 ogy and about its units,28 (appendix 6a+b) 174 Know!. Org. 25(1998)NoA B. Hj0fLtnd: The Classification of Psychology

- One made by the present author for a union cata­ claim that a more general principle can be demon­ log for Danish psychological literature in Denmark strated. Balmer et al. tends to integrate the subject (Hj0rland, 1980; appendix 7) matter of psychology in the different psychological traditions, whereas Graumann et al. tends to focus on This section will comment on these specific classifi­ knowledge fields in abstraction from theoretical ap­ cations in order to illuminate some general principles . proaches. In my opinion Balmer's a proach IS th or tendencies of the classification of psychology (and � � most organic one, whereas Grauman's IS a mOre p SI­ about classification in general). These comments are � tivistic approach to classification. TIl liS the classifi. atlOn not intended as actual suggestions for revision of those � of psychology in these two specific examples can In my systems. In that case a much more detailed examina­ opinion confirmthe inflilence of different epIStemologIcal tion and analysis should be made. theories (r elated to empiricism and hlstonclsm respec· My firstcomment is that - as far as I know - design­ J tively)' It confirms that different views of knowledge do ers of such classifications have not made use of re­ inflilence the way people organize knowledge and may be search done in LIS (1) The knowledge used is mainly the only general principle on which to base a the01Y of based on actual experience with the material to be classification. classified (which is NOT identical with subject My fo urth comment concerns the fin -gradednes of knowledge in, for example, psychology as thi is � � � the classifications. PsycINFO has 155 dIfferent subject taught at universities, even though such bJect �� headings (omitting those without a verbal desc ipt�on) knowledge is supposed to be helpful). In additIOn a . : and is thus one of the most enumerated claSSIfIcatIOns very small amount of logical princ�ples may be ap­ on this subject (see appendix 6). In 1986 the same da­ plied. This raises the important question wheth r such � tabase had only 81 classes. The expanSlOn was mtro­ classifications can benefit from research done III LIS? duced when the database corrected all old sin of omis­ (And what kind of research that might be helpful). In sion not to index monographs. First monographs (in­ order to answer this question we should know cluding chapters) were indexed in a special bi�liogra­ whether these classifications are fulfilling their aims, phy, PsycBOOKS (in print, later only electronIc, later or can be criticized. In other words, we should de­ again integrated in the PsyclNFO database). We have velop some criteria as how to evaluate and improve thus every reason to believe that the current and rela­ such classifications. tive finely graded classification was developed as a way My second comment is that there is - at the most of presenting the records in the printed vol mes of overall level - a similarity in the structures. Such clas­ � PsycBOOKS (which were one-year cumulations op­ sification almost always starts with the metadiscipli­ posed to Psychological Abstracts' monthly cumula­ nary classes (such as the history and methods of the tions). Printed monthly abstract Journals like Psycho­ discipline) then goes to the basic discipli e and finally � logical Abstracts (1927-) are classified in order to per­ the applied areas. Throughout the classtflcations there mit the users to scan the table of contents each month. is a tendency to go from the more general to the more However, when the Abstracts are bound in cumulated specific aspects (we shall return to the important ques­ volumes in libraries, the organization of the bound tion of what "general" means in relation to psycho­ volumes remains month by month classified. Retro­ logical phenomena).3o spective searches for specific subjects can e sily �e My third comment is that the disposition of two . � done in the electronic versions, but in my oplOion thIS German handbooks (Graumann et aI., 1981-; Balmer system does not satisfy the need to browse, the need et aI., 1976-1981) from the same period illustrates that to have a finely-graded classification of large cumula­ the same classificatory task can be tackled in very dif­ tions. To search information electronically by using ferent ways. Of course many differences in specific descriptors and other forms of access has been charac­ classifications are always arbitrary, and we cannot terized as peeking into a room through the ke hole. draw general conclusions or learn important princi­ 'y Cumulated bibliographies (as well as other kInd of ples from accidental properties. We have to search for cumulations, e.g., collected works) can sometimes dis­ essential characteristics. That means that we have to play a beauty, which stands in contrast to uch �e�­ go from the surface of things (or classifications) :0 � hole feeling. The lack of sueh cumulated subject bIbli­ their deeper nature - a principle �e ived from e lI t � � � � ographies with finely-graded classifications might add epistemology and in strict Oppos1tlon to emplnstlC to the feeling of lack of coherence m the dIS IpII e. epistemology. One such accidental property might be � � Each researcher looses his impression of contnbutlOg that Balmer et a1. (1976-1981) is more populist because specific knowledge to a larger struct re. In my opin­ it uses the names of the most well-known researchers � ion psychology needs a much more flOely-grade� cla ­ in psychology as labels for specific volumes and thus � sification than the 155 classes in PsycINFO tf thIS also as subject headings. Behind such "accidental" dif­ need is to be satisfied. ferences between the two German handbooks it is my Know!. Org. 25(1998)NoA 175 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

My fift h comment turns this problem the other way never thought about how theory.laden all subject do· round and hypothesizes that this classification is not mains in psychology actually are! intended to play a significant role in on-line searching. Many of the subject headings in the classification What specific role does this classification play in elec­ are names of non-psychological disciplines (e.g., statis­ tronic retrieval? Even though some records have more tics, genetics, literature, philosophy, linguistics, and than one classification code3! one characteristic of robotics). Many more are names of interdisciplinary classifications compared to descriptors is that they areas, in which psychology is only one of many con­ tcnd to provide a structure where each document has tributors (e.g., gerontology, mass media, marriage & one definite place. This allows for another kind of family, and so on). All this adds to a feeling that this is searching behavior which is more like browsing and not a classification that reflects a view of psychology, navigating than keyholing. Classification codes tend but just a col1ection of loosely related themes without to give general knowledge about a concept) whereas de­ deeper internal connections. This is of course not only scriptor searching tends to identify more, but also - or not primarily - a criticism of the designers of the much more specific knowledge. PsycINFO.classification, but of mainstream psychol. In is very surprising that the classification in Psy­ ogy as such (as analyzed so brilliantly by Danziger, cINFO does not contain any classes for children, ado­ 1997). Even then PsycINFO should make their classi· lescents or adults (but one for older people fication reflect an understanding of psychology to a (SH�2860)). This must be seen from the fact that the higher degree.JJ database some years ago made a retroconversion so One of the most important things is to analyze the that each record was given a new field displaying age relation between subject areas and approaches. What groups.J2 I am not sure this was a good solution or is what, and what provides the basic rule for place­ whether it does not make navigating unclear. It makes ment? In my opinion "2390 Parapsychology" should it more difficult to evaluate the classification in its not be regarded as a subject area in psychology, but as own right. It also gives rise to two different criteria of an extreme non-materialistic (or dualistic) assumption, subdivision in class 2800 and thus to confusion about for which reason it should be relocated to "2140 Sys· whether 2820 cognitive development contains cogni­ terns". In the same way different ways of testing in tive development in older people or not. psychology (e.g., neuropsychological testing and edu· In my opinion classifications of the kind discussed cational measurement) should be relocated to the re­ here do have important functions to play both in on­ spective areas of psychology because methods should line retrieval, in printed cumulative bibliographies and reflect their object, not the other way round. This is as independent "maps" of a subject domain. However, again about going from the surface of things to their in information retrieval they have been regarded as deeper nature. the opposite of user-friendly (because the users have to As written above the main structure is Metadisci­ remember the classification codes or to look them up plines, Basic Science and Applied Science. Below this during on-line retrieval, which can be a stressful and level, there is in the Basic Science part a (hidden) sub· complicated situation even without this task). Also structure going from the general to the specific. The classification-based retrieval came to look old­ first heading is "2100 (General psychology)"". But fashioned and ineffective compared to free text search­ what is IlGeneral Psychology"? and what is general in ing at the start of modern information retrieval. That psychology? may be the main reasons why they are today rela­ At one time in the history of psychology (or rather tively underdeveloped. by some systems of psychology) it was assumed that My sixth comment will be that the classifications basic psychological processes like perception, mem­ lack the understanding of psychology, which I asked ory, learning, and emotions were based on physiologi­ for in section 6 above. I shall give some critical com­ cal principles which were common to all human be­ ments based on an analysis of PsycINFO. Approaches ings, and therefore general or universal.J5 This is in to psychology arc almost totally lacking. Only 2140 my opinion an untenable and obsolete theory, but it is "History and Systems", 3143 Psychoanalytic theory the background for the term "general psychology" as and a few groups in clinical intervention are explicitly covering experimental psychology. So from this posi­ concerned with different theoretical views. However, tion the classifications of psychology are per tradition most people interested in psychology approach the arranged beginning with the more biologically ori· subject with some theoretical favorites or dislikes or ented fields towards the more socio-cultural fields.36 views they would like to know more about. A de­ Much more could of course be said of these con­ tailed classification of theoretical approaches to psy­ crete classifications. One subdiscipline in psychology chology is in my opinion mandatory to serve all three is "Differential psychology!!. This is not represented purposes plus (especially) all the people who have in PsycINFO, and an important discussion of the na­ ture of this discipline could be done (see Asendorph, 176 Know!. Org. 25(1998}NoA B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

1991 for one analysis). Each such analysis teaches us work in the classification field can be done once and important lessons about psychology with important for all, but that it should be a continuous activity, consequences for the understanding of its cognitive which ensures that the value added information pro­ organtZatlOll. vided by information specialists is of such a quality that the users find it relevant. LIS does have a basic 8. Conclusion structure of institutions, researchers, journals, and so on. I think we should play a stronger role in classifica­ I have tried to give a broad outline of psychology tion. Not in monopolizing it but in coordinating re­ and the problems of its classification. My intention search and development. Making our journals relevant has been both to say something important about psy� for people who seek information about the organiza­ chalogy and to contribute to the methods of classifica­ tion of knowledge. This article is an attempt to do just tion research as part of information science. This has that. been done by formulating as many explicit principles and theses as possible. My main assumptions have Appendix 1 been that classifications are not neutral tools but re­ flect a view of the subject domain to be classified. Dif­ Empirical Approaches to the Classification ferent views, paradigms or approaches exist in every of Psychology subject domain, and these views have at the deepest Empiricism is a philosophy that claims that all level a strong connection to basic theories in ontology knowledge originates from the observations made by and epistemology. Therefore basic epistemological individual human beings. All kinds of knowledge es­ theories like empiricism, rationalism, historicism, and tablished by traditions or inborn in humans are re­ pragmatism can provide a basis for the classification of garded with great skepticism. All knowledge based on knowledge fields. experience concerns something particular (isolated); The overall picture of traditional mainstream psy­ empirical knowledge is therefore fragmented. Empiri­ chology shows a discipline with immense worldly cism seeks to establish general knowledge through in­ success, but at the same time a very fragmented disci­ duction made from observed data. For the empiricist pline without a satisfactory theoretical framework. there is no necessity in the world, everything that is The main problem for psychology is its tendency to observed could be different in new observations. be reduced to either biology or sociology. The most The twentieth century has been much dominated promising theory for a united psychology seems to be by empiricism (in the form of logical empiricism/ "activity theory". This theory has the potential of logical positivism) and not least in psychology and in transforming the psychological system of subdisci­ information retrieval theory. The prevailing approach plines and the relations between psychology and other to psychology has been behaviorism, which represents disciplines. an extreme empiristic view of human nature. In spite Research on the classification of knowledge fields of its influence, most philosophers of science agree must itself be based on ontological and epistemologi­ that empiricism/positivism is in very great trouble cal theories. Here it is my claim that empiristic and ra­ and has been so at least since about 1950. tionalistic theories have so far been very dominating, Even though empiricism and behaviorism are ex­ but that the broad family of historically and culturally tremely skeptical towards all forms of inborn knowl­ oriented epistemologies has much to contribute. edge or cognitive functioning, intelligence testing has It is evident that other researchers may continue flourished. Among the methods developed to work this work. Very many dissertations may be written with statistical data in psychology is a specific classifi­ about epistemological and psychological theories and catory method known as fa ctor analysis. This method their historical development, (indeed this might be a has later been exported to many other sciences includ­ reason why few researchers today dare try to contrib­ ing information science. ute to such problems). In my opinion it is important Psychologists have tried to define basic categories that sciences do not disappear in fragmented knowl­ of intelligence and to classify kinds of human talents edge, but try to understand the major lines in the de­ and performances. One method has been by using fac­ velopment, structure and organization of knowledge. tor analysis of a huge amount of empirical scores in Isn't this what research in knowledge organization intelligence tests. One well known example is Guil­ and classification should be about? ford's "structure-of-intellect" model describing 120 Research on classification of knowledge should be facets of intelligence, which were later expanded to relevant for practical purposes like information re­ 180 (Guilford, 1967, 1982). This program has been trieval. I have tried to outline how research done by carried out in a very large scale, but has not been able using the suggested approach can improve practical li­ to maintain the initial optimism with which it was as­ brary and information services. I do not find that sociated, A newer program also building on strictly Know!. Org. 2S(1998)NoA 177 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

empirical methods is connectionism where neural net­ Also algorithms in information retrieval are actu­ works are taught to categorize input and to react ac­ ally used to classify the literature in a database into cordingly. This program has also lost much of the ini­ sets of relevant/non-relevant records. Such techniques tial optimism with which it has been associated. must therefore share the same fundamental problems The problems with these kinds of classificatory as all methods using purely empiristic methods do. methods are intimately connected to basic problems in empiricism. Empiricism neglects the fact that every experience does not only depend on the things experi­ enced but also on the organism making the observa­ Dru&" ;lbuu tions. Not even the simplest observations can be made without an organism capable of categorizing and in­ Ptrson�lity

terpreting the observations. On the basis of a given set Psycho;l��IYlrs I Ptrce�tion of empirical data many different generalizations can , , be made. That depends on which attributes are chosen SeXUjl! beh�vior \ L1nrulst/cs

as the most relevant characteristics. Empirical classifi­ Le�de:Shlp 1I cations rest on "similarity" or "resemblance". What Sod�1 Psychdloty Cornitive b�r�nct ------+--- - -�-- ...... - -- .... ------_. one should regard as "similar" data is, however, not a mobility 1 uw . . , question which empiricism itself can answer. In fact it Soci�1 choice SociololY ! M;ln;.. ment Decision m�kinr turns into a question concerning the purpose and aim •

I • • Fln�nce of the classification. Observations are theory-driven, Moneury Inlern�tlon�1

j!!..tjl!'L ______Le�i.t[glll______and so are classifications. _ , i hmlly pl�nnfnr I CONTENT , . , POliliCS

A bibliometric two-dimensional plot of 20 largest social sci­ ence clusters (from Garfiel, 1979, p. 140, fig. 8.31) PRODUCTS Units

Classes

Relations

Systems

Transformations

Implications

ProKtive OPERATIONS IntufnlllCl Evaluation Convergent production Divergent production Memory retention Memory recording Hemispheric difftnllCts Cognition Guilford's "structure-of-intellect"-model (Guilford, 1967)

The empirical methods of the classification of lit­ I Mtmory st�rch: erature have especially been used in the bibliometric I Human Information I procfSSlns tradition by using the citation indexes as the database. I I Concrete examples can be found in Garfield (1976, I 1979 & 1992; see examples in figures below). The strengths and limitations of this approach in informa­ tion science is discussed in more detail in Hj0rland, A Bibliometric diagram of memory and learning macroclus­ 1997. ter (from Garfield, 1979, p. 142, fig. 8.33) 178 Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 B. Hjmbnd: The Classification of Psychology

Appendix 2 A Facet Analysis of Psychology Rationalistic Approaches to the Classification In Hj0rland (1997) I have argued that the theory of of Psychology facet analysis in LIS classification developed by Ran­ ganathan, the British "Classification Research Group" Rationalism is a philosophy which emphasises rea­ and others can be interpreted as a typical rationalistic soning and a priori theorizing. Rationalism is - like method for the development of a classification empiricism - an objectivistic, reductionistic, founda­ scheme. Mills & Broughton (1978) represents the best tionalistic, ahistorical and apolitical approach. Ration­ attempt to apply this method to developing a classifi­ alism analyzes concepts from a logical point of view cation of psychology. In Hj0rland (1988) I designed - and tries to organize concepts in one all-embracing inspired by Mills & Broughton (1978) - the following structure. In knowledge classification it tries to clas­ facet model for psychology. A more detailed discus­ sify all sciences in one all-embracing structure. This sion can be found in Hj0rland (1988). structure is objective, and does not depend on differ­ ent points of view, purposes or interests. Classification Facet 1: Research methods that is based purely on logical division into mutual ex­ Facet 2: Theoretical orientation clusive and exhaustive classes reflects a rationalistic Facet 3: Time, place and form approach. The facet-analytic tradition in classification Facet 4: Psychological processes research is the most typical representative of rational­ Facet 5: Psychobiology Ism. Facet 6: Individuals and personality Theories of language, concepts and thoughts which Facet 7: Social and cultural conditions try to identify an "absolute syntax" or universal laws Facet 8: Sphere of application and principles that do not depend on the context or cultural background of the users are rationalistic by Facet model for nature. Rationalism finds that the predisposition to the classification of psychology realize basic concepts that do not originate from expe­ Hj0rland (1988) rience must be inborn. It is our inborn way of form­ ing concepts which determines the essential connec­ This model can of course be further elaborated. For tions between the things we can learn. The rationalis­ example, Facet 7 -could be subdivided according to a tic point of view also presumes that some kind of ab­ kind of "systems approach" to the social systems, of stract analysis or fixed procedure could be used to which the individual is a part, and which influences penetrate the surface of documents, thereby revealing the individual. Possible levels could be: their true subjects. Its method is characterized by the tendency to formulate and follow rules and principles. The individual person According to rationalism it is possible to organize The dyad knowledge in axioms, definitions and theorems in Families every domain of knowledge. Small groups Below is given some illustrations of how to apply Organizations the rationalistic method to classify psychological Communities knowledge. A comprehensive critique of the limita­ Countries tions of this approach (and of the concrete examples) Cultures will not be given in this appendix. It should, however, These levels can be treated top down or bottom up. be evident that rationalism on the one hand has prob­ The chosen approach is related to epistemological is­ lems in relating its theoretical approach to empirical sues regarding "methodological individualism" versus reality (it lacks an empirical foundation). On the other "methodological collectivism" in psychology and the hand rationalism has problems in its claim on the non­ social sciences. historical character and the disinterestedness of the re­ lationships between concepts. Rationalism presup­ poses that the principles of division are of an external character, that subject matter is not formed by organic relations of an internal character. The inherent limita­ tions will be evident in the comparison with the other approaches. Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 179 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Mills & Broughton (1978). IFR Imagination, symbolism, imagery, Bliss Bibliographic Classification. 2. Ed. intuition IFV Learning and memory Class I: Psychology and Psychiatry. Outline IFW Memory I PSYCHOLOGY IG Learning IAA Philosophical Concepts IGM Conditioned learning (as Philosophy AA/ AI) IH Thinking, reasoning, judgment, IAJ Schools of psychology problem solving IAK Psycho-analysis IHT Parapsychology: hypnotism, ESP ... IAR Behaviourism IJ The Subconscious and Unconscious, IE Research and experiment, experimental depth psychology psychology IJK Subconscious, extraconscious IBN Tests, measurement, assessment, lJL Defense mechanisms scales IJP Unconscious, sleep, dreams IC Animal psychology IJV The individual, individual psychology ICC Human psychological processes and IJW Self concept, personal identity attributes, behaviour IK Personality, character, temperament ICD Influences, determinants, IKA W Personal construct theory enVironment IKK Traits, characteristics ICE Stress (general) IKM B Psychoanalytic personality factors: ICE X Physical, physiographical factors Id, Ego ... ICI Biological factors, physiological IKO Differential psychology, individual psychology, psychosomatics differences ICJ Psychological factors (as IC/IX) IKO T Typologies, types of persons ICK Social factors IKQ The sexes, sex psychology ICL B (Attributes of psychological processes) IKS Sex behaviour Norms, variations .... IL Types of persons other than by (Types of processes) sex or age ICM Developmental, psychogenesis (general) (by deprivation, occupation, ICM R Differentiation (general) religion, family membership ...) ICP Sensation and perception, ILK (By age) Developmental sensory processes psychology ICQ Stimulus and response (general) ILY Age, age groups ICT (Types of response) 1M Children, child psychology ICV Conditional reflexes, conditioning IMM The family, family relations lD Perceptual and motor processes, IMN (Particular ages) Infants, sensorimotor activity adolescents ... lDD Ability, aptitudes, skills, IMU Handicapped persons intelligence IMV Exceptional persons: geniuses ... lDJ Performance, achievement IN Social psychology, social behaviour lDQ Senses: proprioceptive, INL Attitudes ...con formity ...power and someathetic, visual... influence ... IE Motor, psychomotor processes INO Social interaction IEH Motivation, drives, desires INP Interpersonal interaction IEJ Involuntary behaviour, instincts, 10 Communication habits 10P F Signs, symbols lEN Voluntary actions lOR Verbal, language lEV Will, volition, choice, decision 10V Media: audience, information IF Affective psychology: emotions, IP Socialisation feelings IPR Differentiation and stratification, IFG (Types of emotion) roles IFK Cognitive, higher mental processes IPY Psychology of everyday life IFM Associative processes, concept (clothes, appearance ...) formation IQ Groups IFQ X Ideation IQR Group dynamics IQS J Types of groups 180 Know!. Org. 2S(J998)NoA B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology

IQV Etnopsychology: national, IVT Phobic neuroses, phobias racial, cultural IWB Personality disorders: IQY (Bytypes of persons) (As IK/IM) psychopaths ... IRC Applied psychology IWD Behavioural disorders, (Applied psychology) psychopathology IRD Clinical psychology (general) IWX B Non-psychiatric conditions IRE Mental health, hygiene IWX P Types of persons, psychiatric IRF Medical psychology, psychiatry, patients abnormal psychology, IWX W (By sex) (as IKWIIKX) psychopathology IWY (By various characteristics) IRF RY Therapeutic environments e.g. Socially deprived ... IRF T Hospitals, clinics ... (as IL) IRG Psychiatric practice, clinical (By age) action IX Children (as 1M) IRJ Diagnosis, systems IY Other applied psychologies ISB Types of treatment, therapy >'Alternative (divided like whole ISF Community mental health classification - e.g. Psychology of ISG Physical law IYS) ISH Drug therapy, pharmaco­ therapy ISP Psychotherapy ::- This is an inverted schedule and filing order of fac­ ISR K Psycho-analysis, analyti­ ets & arrays is the reverse of their citation order. cal psychotherapy ::- Compound classes are built by retroactive synthesis ISW Group therapy - terms lover in schedule cite first - e.g.:

ISY Brief psycho-therapy - Personality traits in children = Children - person- IUB Mental disorders, types of ality traits IMK K;

disorders - Group therapy in paranoia = Paranoia - Group IUB R Nature of mental illness, therapy IVH SW; aetiology - Performance measurement with the mental re­

(Bycause) tarded = Mental retarded - Performance IUM Organic, physical causes - Measurement IUN DJB N >'Alternative (preferred in Class H Medicine) (Bycause and manifestation) IUN Mental retardation, idiocy, imbecility ... IUO N Psychosomatics :�Alternati7)e (preferred in Class H Medicine) IUP (Disorders of psychological processes) (as IA/IQ) IUP G Learning disorders IUP O Communication disorders, aphasia IUY Autism IVB Psychoses IVC Organic psychoses: toxic ... IVC Y Functional IVD Affective: mania-depressive ... IVH Paranoia IVN Schizophrenia IVQ Neuroses IVR Anxiety neuroses IVS Hysterical neuroses Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 181 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

A Dichotomy Classification of Psychology 1859-1952). James and Dewey developed the prag­ matic approach in psychology. Pragmatism was in the Below is shown a dichotomy classification of psy� USA an alternative approach to Titchner's "Structur­ cbaIogy. These rationalistic principles of division can alism" from about 1896 until it was gradually replaced be found in many concrete classifications. They have, by behaviorism from about 1913 to 1930. It is closely however, great difficulties in dealing with the internal related to the functionalistic school in Chicago at the relationships in the subdisciplines of psychology. end of the nineteenth century and influenced by John They display formal relationships, not organic rela­ Dewey and James R. Angell. tions. However, pragmatic and functionalistic approaches Human psychology have influenced psychology outside the explicit Theoretical psychology schools from Charles Darwin and until this day. To­ "General psychology" day we see a revival or tlneo-pragmatic" tendency. "Individual psychology" Schultz & Schultz (1996) mention James, Hall, Angell, Adult psychology Cattell, Woodworth & Carr under this heading. They Higher psychological processes find that functionalism disappeared about 1950. Cognitive psychology Experimental psychology Psychoanalysis/Depth Psychology (1895-) Positivistic psychology Founded by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) about Non-positivistic psychology 1895. Has gradually influenced academic psychology. Non-experimental psychology It has divided itself in a large number of competing Emotional & motivational schools. According to Schultz and Schultz (1996, in­ psychology side cover) it disappeared about 1975. In my opinion, Lower psychological processes however, it is still an important approach in psychol­ Child & adolescent psychology ogy (see also appendix 4). (The term "psychoanalysis" Social psychology does not include the psychology of C. G. Jung. The Cultural psychology term "Depth psychology" is suggested as a generic Applied psychology term including psychoanalysis, the analytic psychol­ Animal psychology ogy of Jung, and others).

Behaviorism (1913-1965':-) John B. Watson's "manifest" for a behaviorist psy­ Appendix 3 chology from 1913 can be pointed out as a formal es­ Major Theoretical Approaches in the History of tablishment of the behaviorist movement, even such Modern Psychology persons as Pavlov and Thorndike had contributed es­ sentially at an earlier time. About 1965 behaviorism Psychophysics/Structuralism (1879-1920) seemed to be succeeded by cognitivism. However, es­ Founded by Ernest Weber (1795-1878), Gustav sential characteristics of behaviorism have, since about Theodor Fechner (1801-1887) and Wilhelm Wundt 1930 and until now, influenced psychology according (1832-1920). Wundt founded the first psychological to Danziger (1997). This is a broad, eclectic, implicit laboratory in Leipzig 1879. In America Edward Brad­ "variable psychology". According to Danziger all ford Titchener (1867-1927) saw himself as a true suc­ modern psychology has adapted the basic views of be­ cessor of Wundt (but in fact he altered Wundt's views haviorism, which has become "the language of psy­ dramatically). The term "structuralism" was coined by chology" even among psychologists who do not re­ Titchener (Not to be confused with the later structur­ gard themselves as behaviorists. alism inspired by the linguist Ferdinand de Saussure, a Byrne (1995, p. 132) writes: "Introductory texts in movement that also Jean Piaget felt himself associated the philosophy of mind often begin with a discussion with). The influence of structuralism declined with of behaviorism, presented as one of the few theories of the breakthrough of behaviorism about 1913 and it mind that have been conclusively refuted. But matters almost disappeared with the death of Titchener 1927. are not that simple: behaviorism, in one form or an­ other, is still alive and kicking". Functionalism/Pragmatism (1896-1930) Pragmatism as philosophy was founded by Charles Phenomenological psychology (1912-1940) Sanders Pierce (1839-1914). It was supported and con­ Philosophically related to phenomenology as tinued by William James (1842-1910) and John Dewey founded year 1900 by Edmund Husserl (1859-1938), 182 Know!. Org. 25(1998)NoA B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology but in experimental psychology an approach related Genetic Epistemology (1960-1990) to Gestalt psychology. The Danish psychologist Edgar Founded by Jean Piaget (1896-1980). The first Rubin (1876-1951) wrote in 1915 a famous book about books by Piaget were published in the 1920'ties, but visual perception in which he described the figure and his international influence (especially in the USA) be­ ground phenomena. In Europe phenomenology re� came dominant about 1960. It culminated with the mained an important philosophy until the start of death of Piaget in 1980. Since then Piaget's influence World War II (1940), where it was forced out by ana­ has decreased. An important " neo-piagetian" enclave is lytical philosophy. still influential. Since then phenomenological psychology has in­ ternationally remained a small enclave. In Copenha* Cognitivism (1965-) gen the influence of phenomenological psychology is still perceptible In the USA "Journal of Phenomenol­ Cognitivism is an approach influenced by informa­ ogical Psychology" was founded in 1970. Today the tion theory, cybernetics, and systems theory (devel­ influenceof phenomenology tends to increase. oped around 1948). As a starting point the year 1956 may be mentioned. This year J crome Bruner pub­ Gestalt psychology (1912-1940) lished "A Study of Thinking" and Chomsky's "Logi­ cal Structure of Linguistic Theory" circulated in a pre­ Gestalt psychology is rooted in phenomenological liminary edition. philosophy (Franz Brentano, 1838-1917 and Edmund This approach developed very forcefully, and was HU5serl). The term "gestalt quality" was first coined from 1965 the dominant view in American and Inter­ by C. von Ehrenfels in 1890 (a student of Brentano). It national psychology. One of the pioneers, Herbert A. became a formal school of psychology in 1912 when Simon received the Nobel price (1978 in Economics). M. Wertheimer, Wolfgang Kohler and Kurt Koffka From the late 1980'ties this approach has been met studied apparent movements using stroboscopic ex­ with increasing criticism, and its influence has mark­ periments. It subsequently headquartered in Berlin. edly decreased. Among the critics are also pioneers as Jerome Bruner and Ulrich Neisser. Humanistic Psychology (1962-) Humanistic psychology was established as an ap­ Cultural historical psychology IActivity theory proach in modern psychology with an independent (1990-) organization and journals from 1962. ("Association fo r Founded as a school of psychology in Russia by Humanistic Psychology" and "journal 0/ Humanistic Lev. S. Vygotsky (1896-1934), A. N. Leontjev (1903- Psychology" ). Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) belongs to 1979), and A. R. Luria (1902-1977). It was suppressed the pioneers of this movement. Humanistic psychol­ in the Stalinist period but regained influence in the ogy was founded as "the third force", in explicit dissat­ Soviet Union during the thaw. Later it first influenced isfaction with both behaviorism and psychoanalysis European and then American psychology. In the (especially the deterministic view of human nature). It 1990'ties it has become a mainstream in international based itself on principles from the philosophy of hu­ psychology. It is related to American pragmatism. manism (which goes back to the latter half of the fif­ teenth century). Poststructural psychologyIDiscursive psychology I The history of psychology might be reinterpreted Postmodern psychology (1990-) from a humanist point of view. It is rooted in the ren­ In the 1990s psychology is increasingly orienting it­ naissance and in a continental European tradition with �elf towards broader tendencies in philosophy and cul­ names such as Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716), ture. Post structuralism (especially Michael Foucault, Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), S0ren Aabye Kierkegaard 1926-1984), discursive psychology, narrative psychol­ (1813-1855), Wilhelm Dilthey (1833-1911), Edmund ogy, "social constructivism" and post modern thoughts Husser! (1859-1938), William James (1842-1910), Wil­ are important influences in modern psychology. Their liam Stern (1871-1938), Car! Rogers (1902-1986), Rollo main characteristics are a historical and a sociocultural May (1909-), Abraham Maslow (1908-1970), and turn and a rejection of the individualistic metaphysics Gordon W. Allport (1897-1967). which have dominated psychology since Rene De­ According to Schultz & Schultz (1996, inside cover) cartes (1596-1650) and Emmanuel Kant (1724-1804). humanistic psychology disappeared as an approach in psychology about 1985. In my opinion, however, humanistic psychology (including existentialism) is still influential in psychology. Knowl. Org. 25(1998)NoA 183 B, Hjerland: The Classification of Psychology

Psychophysics/"Structuralism"

Pragmatism/Functionalism

Psychoanalysis/Depth psychology

Behaviorism

I Phenomenological psychology

Gestalt psychology

Humanistic psychology

Genetic epistemology

Cognitivism

Cultural histo­ rical psychology

Poststructural, discursive, and postmodern approaches

1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

Timetable. Modern approaches to psychology. 184 Know!. Org. 2S(1998)No.4 B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology

Appendix 4 Appendix 5

Approaches to Psychoanalysis CLASSIFICATIONS USED BY TWO GERMAN "HANDBUCHER" (Based on Andkjaer Olsen & Sima K0ppe, 1996, page < >, 61-67) (Graumann et a!. 1- 88 1981-; and Balmer et a!. 1- 16, 1976-1981) (1) Orthodox (d ogmatic) Freudian psychoanalysis. Examples: Kurc Eissler (Direccor of the Freud- 1. PLAN FOR archive in New York) and Humberco Nagera "ENZYKLOP ii.DIE DER PSYCHOLOGIE" (member of the Anna Freud group) Graumann et a!. 1- < 88 >, 1981-

(2) Object.relation theories. (" � Volumes published on 1998) - The British object relation theories. Ancestor: Sandor Ferenczi, founded in THEMENBEREICH A England by Melanie Klein and Michael GESCHICHTE UND STELLUNG DER PSYCHOLO­ Balint. Adopted by Ronald Fairbairn GIE INNERHALB DER WISSENSCHAfTEN and Donald Winnicott. The Tavistock tradition. Modern contributors: Wilfred Serie l· Geschicbte der Psychologie Bion and Donald Meltzer. - The American Self psychology Bd.1: Geschichte der Psychologie I (bis zur Mitte des Heinz Kohut and Otco Kernberg 19.Jahrhunderts). Bd.2: Geschichte der Psychologie II (bis zum friihen (3) ]7, eories influenced bythe positivistic theOlY 20.Jahrhundert). a/ science. Bd.3: Geschichte der Psychologie III (im 20. jJhrhun­ - Ego psychology in the USA dert). Heinz Hartmann - "The aggressive critics" Serie II:Die Psychologie innerhalb der Wissenschaften (e .g., Adolf Griinbaum) - The empirical infant research Bd.l: Psychologie und Philosophie. Bd.2: Psychologie und biologische Wissenschaften. (4) Theories withlo cliS on socialization and interaction. Bd.3: Psychologic und Sozialwissenschaften. - The empirical infant research - The F reudo-marxists Serie Ill· Begrijfswi5rterbllcb derPsy cbologie - The American culturalists - The psychosomatic researchers (3-4 Bande).

(5) ]7Jeories influenced by the phenomenological and hermeneutical tradition. THEMENBEREICH B - Ludwig Binswanger ME THODOLOGIE UND METHODEN - Karl-Otto Apel, Jiirgen Habermas & Paul Rica:ur Serie l- Fo rschungsmethoden der Psychologie - Roy Schafer ':·Bd.!: Methodologische Grundlagen der Psychologie - Alfred Lorenzer ':·Bd.2: Datenerhebung.(1982) (6) Theories influenced bylinguistic structuralism. " Bd.3: Messen und Testen.(1983) - Jacques Lacan ;�Bd,4: Stntkturierung und Reduzierung von Daten, (1982) "Bd.5: Hypotesenpriifung.(1982)

Serie Il- Psychologische Diagnostik "Bd.1: Grundlagen psychologischer Diagnostik. (1982) "Bd.2: Intclligenz- und Leistungsdiagnostik.(1982) "·Bd.3: Personlichkeitsdiagnostik.(1982) ':·Bd.4: Verhaltensdiagnostik.(1982) Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 185 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Serie 111: Psychologische Interventionsmethoden Bd.4: Psychologie der Lebcnsspanne. Bd.s: Psychogerontologie. Bd.l: padagogisch.psychologische Interventions· Bd.6: Entwicklung und Sozialisation. mcthoden. Bd.7: Angewandte Entwicklungspsychologie. Bd.2: Psychotherapeutische Methoden I Bd.3: Psychotherapeutische Methoden II Serie VI: Sozia/psych% gie Bd.4: Rehabilitationsmethoden. Bd.!: Soziale Urteilsbildung. Serie IV' Evaluationsfo rschllng Bd.2: Einstellungen und Vorurteile. Bd.3: Soziale Intecaktionen. Bd.l: Evaluationsforschung: Modelle und Methoden. Bd.4: Soziale Beziehungen. Bd.2: Evaluationsforschung: Anwendungen. Bd.S: Soziale Kommunikation. Bd.6: Gruppendynamik. THEMENBEREICH C Bd.7: Kollektives Vechalten. THE ORIE UND FORSCHUNG Serie VII.' Kllltllrverg/eichende Psychologie Serie I: Bi% gische Psych% gie Bd.!: Theocien und Methoden Kulturvecgelichender ':·Bd.!: Grundlagen der Neuropsychologie. (1996) Psychologie. ':·Bd.2: Klinische Neuropsychologie. Bd.2: Kulturelle Determinanten des Erlebens und Ver· Bd.3: Psychophysiologie des Lemens und des Gedacht· haltens. 0l5ses. Bd.4: Biopsychologie dec Emotion. Sene VI II: Differentlelle Psychologle lind Pmonlichkeits· ':·Bd.5: Ergebnisse und Anwendungen dec Psycho. fo rschllng physiologie ':·Bd.l: Grundlagen und Methoden dec Differentiellen Bd.6: Psychophysiologic dec Motocik. Psychologie. (!996) "Bd.2: Vechaltens und Leistungsuntecschiede (1995). Serie II.' Kognition ::-Bd.3: Temperaments- und Personlichkeitsunter­ ':·Bd.!: Wahrnehmung.(!994) schiede. (!996) "Bd.2: Aufmerksamkeit. (1996) Bd.4: Persiinlichkeitstheorien. "Bd.3: Psychomotocik. (1994) Bd.s: "Bd.4: Gedachtnis. (1996) Bd.s: Serie IX' Okologische Psychologie "Bd.6: Wissen. (!998) Bd.!: Allgemeine Okologische Psychologie. ':·Bd.7: Lemen (1996) Bd.2: Spezifische Umwelten und Umweltprobleme. Bd.8:

Serie III: Sp rache THEMENBEREICH D PRAXISGEBIETE Bd.l: Psychologic dec Spcachproduktion. Bd.2: Psychologie der Sprachcezeption. Serie I' Pddagogische Psychologie Bd.3: Psychologie des Lesens und Schreibens. Bd.4: Gespcachs. und Textanalyse. ':·Bd.l: Psychologie dec Erziehung und Sozialisation. Bd.s: Sprachentwicklung und Spracherwecb. ':·Bd.2: Psychologie des Lernens und dec Instcuk· Bd.6: Psychologie dec Spcachanomalien. tion.(1996) ':·Bd.3: Psychologie des Unterrichts und dec Schule Serie IV: Mo tivation lind Emotion ':·Bd.4: Psychologie dec Ecwachsenenbildung. ':·Bd.!: Theocien und Focmen dec Motivation.(1982) Serie II' Klinische Psychologie " Bd.2: Psychologie der Motivc.(1982) ':·Bd.3: Psychologie der Emotion.(1990) ':·Bd.!: Grundlagen dec Klinischen Psychologie. (1996) ':·Bd.4: Motivation, Volition und Handlung.(!996) "Bd.2: Psychische Stocungen und ihre Behandlung. Bd.3: Psychologie in der Klinik. Sene V· Entwick/llng Bd.4: Klinische Becatung und Psychotherapie. Bd.S: Kinderpsychotherapie und Ecziehungsbecatung. Bd.!: Allgemeine Entwicklungspsychologie. Bd.2: Friihkindliche Entwicklung. Bd.3: Entwicklung im Kindes· und Jugendaltcc. 186 Knowl. Org. 2S(1998)No.4 B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology

Serie 111: Wirtschafts-, Organisations- lind 2. DISPOSITION FOR "DIE PSYCHOLOGIE Arbeitspsychologie DES 20. JAHRHUNDERTS 1-16" Balmer, H. et al. (1976-1981) "Bd.!: Arbeitspsychologie.(1987) ':-Bd.2: Ingenieurpsychologie. (1990) I: Die europaische Tradition. Tendenzen, Schul en, ':-Bd.3: Organisationspsychologie.(1989) Entwicklungslinien. ':-Bd.4: Marktpsychologie als Sozialwissenschaft.(1982) II: Freud und die Folgen (1). Von der klassischen ':-Bd.5: Methoden und Anwendungen in der Markt- Psychoanalyse ... psychologie.(1982) III: Freud und die Folgcn (2) ... bis zur allgemein­ Serie IV- Psychologie im Rechtswesen afztlichen Psychotherapie Bd.1: Forensische Begutachtung. IV: Pawlow und die Folgen. Von der klassischen Bd.2: Psychologie des delinquenten Verhaltens. Konditionierung bis zur Verhaltensthcrapie. V: Binet und die Folgen. Testverfahren, Differen­ Serie V- Sportspsychologie (ielle Psychologic, Personlichkeitsforschung. Bd.1: Sportspsychologie I: Sportliche Fahigkeiten und VI: Lorenz und die Folgen. Tierpsychologie, Verhal­ ihre Entwicklung, tensforschung, Physiologische Psychologic. Bd.2: Sportspsychologie II: Sportliche Leistung und ihre Bedingungen. VII: Piaget und die Folgen. Entwicklungspsycholo­ gie, Denkpsychologie, Genetische Psychologic. Serie VI: Verkehrspsychologie VIII: Lewin und die Folgen. Gruppedynamik, Bd.1: Verkehrspsychologie I: Grundlagenforschung. Sozialpsychologie, Gruppentherapie. Bd.2: Verkehrpsychologie II: Begutachtung und inter­ IX: Ergebnisse fur die Medizin (1). Psychosomatik. vention. X: Ergebnisse fur die Medizin (2) . Psychiatrie. XI: Konsequenzen fur die Padagogik (1). Das Kind im Elternhaus. XII: Konsequenzen flir die Padagogik (2). Das Kind in der Schule. XIII: Anwendungen im Berufsleben. Arbeits-, Wirtschafts- und Verkehrpsychologie. XIV: Auswirkungen auf die Kriminologie. Deliquenz und Gesellschaft. XV: Transcendenz, Imagination und Kreativitat. Re­ ligion, Parapsychologie, Literatur und Kunst. XVI: Index Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 187 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Appendix 6a PsycINFO [155 classes. Numbers to the left refer to the number of records in the database in 1998]

32388 SH�21 137725 SH � 25 23925 SH�2100 (GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY) 51974 SH=2500 (PHYSIOLOGICAL PSY- 8463 SH=2140 (HISTORY & SYSTEMS) CHOLOGY & NEUROSCIENCE) 2697 SH=2510 (GENETICS) 95250 SH�22 21794 SH=2520 (NEUROPSYCHOLOGY & 20084 SH=2200 (PSYCHOMETRICS & STATIS- NEUROLOGY) TICS & METHODOLOGY 9913 SH=2530 (ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY) 52945 SH=222 6528 SH � 2540 (pHYSIOLOGICAL PROC- 7261 SH�2220 (rESTS & TESTING) ESSES) 474 SH�2221 (SENSORY & MOTOR 8702 SH=2560 (pSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY) TESTING) 36415 SH=2580 (pSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY) 3911 SH�2222 (DEVELOPMENTAL SCALES & SCHEDULES) 11586 SH=26 7880 SH�2223 (PERSONALITY SCALES & 3187 SH=2600 (PSYCHOLOGY & THE HU- INVENTORIES) MANITIES) 14432 SH=2224 (CLINICAL PSYCHO- 5664 SH�2610 (LITERATURE & FINE ARTS) LOGICAL TESTING) 2746 SH=2630 (pHILOSOPHY) 2656 SH�2225 (NEUROPSYCHOLOGI- CAL ASSESSMENT) 18629 SH=27 1291 SH�2226 (HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY 8133 SH=2700 (COMMUNICATION SYS- TESTING) TEMS) 12630 SH=2227 (EDUCATIONAL MEAS- 7849 SH � 2720 (LINGUISTICS & LAN- UREMENT) GUAGE & SPEECH) 2514 SH�2228 (OCCUPATIONAL & EM- 2648 SH�2750 (MASS MEDIA COMMUNI- PLOYMENT TESTING) CATIONS) 170 SH=2229 (CONSUMER OPINION & ATTITUDE TESTING) 120063 SH�28 11005 SI-I � 2240 (ST ATISTI CS & MATHEMAT- 49082 SH=2800 (DEVELOPMENTAL PSY- ICS) CHOLOGY) 11981 SH � 2260 (RESEARCH METHODS & 32018 SH=2820 (COGNITIVE & PERCEP- EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN) TUAL DEVELOPMENT) 33199 SH� 2840 (pSYCHOSOCIAL & PER- 162688 SH=23 SONALITY DEVELOPMENT) 94218 SH=2300 (HUMAN EXPERIMENTAL 8439 SH�2860 (GERONTOLOGY) PSYCHOLOGY) 23370 SH=232 77916 SH�29 4621 SH=2320 (SENSORY PERCEPTION) 21406 SH = 2900 (SOCIAL PROCESSES & SO- 13684 SH=2323 (VISUAL PERCEPTION) CIAL ISSUES) 5065 SH=2326 (AUDITORY & SPEECH 2555 SH=2910 (SOCIAL STRUCTURE & PERCEPTION) ORGANIZATION) 3076 SH=2330 (MOTOR PROCESSES) 4720 SH�2920 (RELIGION) 33090 SH�234 8026 SH� 2930 (CULTURE & ETHNOLOGY) 18970 SH=2340 (COGNITIVE PROCESSES) 20891 SH�295 13260 SH=2343 (LEARNING & MEMORY) 11190 SH� 2950 (MARRIAGE& FAMIL Y) 861 SH�2346 (ATTENTION) 2256 SH=2953 (DIVORCE & REMAR- 3634 SH�2360 (MOTIVATION& EMOTION) RIAGE) 3393 SH�2380 (CONSCIOUSNESS STATES) 7447 SH�2956 (CHILDREARING & 2133 SH�2390 (pARAPSYCHOLOGY) CHILD CARE) 50549 SH�24 4066 SH�2960 (pOLITICAL PROCESSES & 20315 SH=2400 (ANIMAL EXPERIMENTAL & POLITICAL ISSUES) COMPARATIVE PSYCHOLOGY) 5881 SH�2970 (SEX ROLES & WOMEN'S IS- 11194 SH� 2420 (LEARNING & MOTIV A- SUES) TION) 6275 SH=2980 (SEXUAL BEHAVIOR & 19041 SH�2440 (SOCIAL & INSTINCTIVE SEXUAL ORIENTATION) BEHAVIOR) 188 Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

4173 SH�2990 (DRUG & ALCOHOL USAGE 3642 SH�3295 (CARDIOVASCULAR (LEGAL)) DISORDERS) 22952 SH�3297 (NEUROLOGICAL DIS- 68593 SH�30 ORDERS & BRAIN DAM- 43416 SH�3000 (SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY) AGE) 14046 SH�3020 (GROUP & INTERPER- 5774 SH�3299 (VISION & HEARING & SONAL PROCESSES) SENSORY DISORDERS) 11133 SH�3040 (SOCIAL PERCEPTION & COGNITION) 265848 SH�33 71965 SH =3300 (HEALTH & MENTAL 61737 SH�31 HEALTH TREATMENT & PRE- 25658 SH=3100 (PERSONALITY PSYCHOL- VENTION) OGY) 63311 SH�331 28644 SH=3120 (pERSONALITY TRAITS & 21376 SH� 3310 (pSYCHOTHERAPY & PSY- PROCESSES) CHO-THERAPEUTIC COUN- 7444 SH�314 SELING) 2041 SH�3140 (pERSONALITY THEORY) 2680 SH=3311 (COGNITIVE THERAPY) 5403 SH�3143 (pSYCHOANALYTIC 11097 SH�3312 (BEHAVIOR THERAPY & THEORY) BEHAVIOR MODIFICA- TION) 286512 SH�32 13160 SH=3313 (GROUP & FAMILY 100621 SH=3200 (PSYCHOLOGICAL & PHYSI- THERAPY) CAL DISORDERS) 2987 SH=3314 (INTERPERSONAL & CLI- 55332 SH�321 ENT CENTERED & HU- 16889 SH=321O (pSYCHOLOGICALDISOR- MAN DERS) 12019 SH=3315 (pSYCHOANALYTIC 10913 SH�3211 (AFFECTIVE DISORDERS) THERAPy) 15297 SH�3213 (SCHIZOPHRENIA & 24498 SH=3340 (CLINICAL PSYCHOPHAR- PSYCHOTIC STATES) MACOLOGy) 8451 SH = 3215 (NEUROSES& ANXIETY 10444 SH�335 DISORDERS) 5281 SH�3350 (SPECIALIZED INTERVEN- 3786 SH�3217 (pERSONALITY DISOR- TIONS) DERS) 1929 SH=3351 (CLINICAL HYPNOSIS) 42048 SH=323 470 SH=3353 (SELF HELP GROUPS) 22459 SH=3230 (BEHAVIOR DISORDERS& 1088 SH = 3355 (LAY & PARAPROFES- ANTISOCIAL BEHAVIOR) SIONAL & PASTORAL 15224 SH=3233 (SUBSTANCE ABUSE & COUNSELING) ADDICTION) 1676 SH=3357 (ART & MUSIC & MOVE- 8279 SH= 3236 (CRIMINALBEHAVIOR & MENT THERAPY) JUVENILE DELIN- 20297 SH�336 QUENCy) 3521 SH� 3360 (HEALTH PSYCHOLOGY & 18244 SH�325 MEDICINE) 5815 SH�3250 (DEVELOPMENTAL DISOR- 4812 SH�3361 (BEHAVIORAL& PSY- DERS & AUTISM) CHOLOGICAL TREAT- 5340 SH=3253 (LEARNING DISORDERS) MENTOF 7090 SH�3256 (MENTAL RETARDA- 5593 SH=3363 (MEDICALTREATMENT TION) OF PHYSICAL ILLNESS) 5521 SH=3260 (EATINGDISORDERS) 6371 SH=3365 (pROMOTION & MAIN- 3345 SH�3270 (SPEECH & LANGUAGE TENANCE OF DISORDERS) HEALTH & WEL 380 SH�3280 (ENVIRONMENTALTOXINS 49476 SH�337 & HEALTH) 17133 SH�3370 (HEALTH & MENTAL 61169 SH�329 HEALTH SERVICES) 21576 SH�3290 (pHYSICAL& SOMATO- 1486 SH �3371 (OUTPATIENT SERVICES) FORM & PSYCHOGENIC DIS- 12400 SH=3373 (COMMUNITY & SOCIAL ORDERS) SERVICES) 4643 SH�3291 (IMMUNOLOGICALDIS- 2342 SH=3375 (HOME CARE & HOSPICE) ORDERS) 3728 SH=3377 (NURSING HOMES & 2602 SH=3293 (CANCER) RESIDENTIAL CARE) Know!. Org. 25(1998)NoA 189 B. Hj0fland: The Classification of Psychology

12396 SH�3379 (INPATIENT & HOSPITAL 5682 SH � 3660 (ORGANIZATIONAL BE- SERVICES) HAVIOR) 26497 SH�338 3342 SH�3670 (WORKING CONDITIONS & 7331 SH� 3380 (REHABILITATION) INDUSTRIAL SAFETY) 12526 SH�3383 (DRUG & ALCOHOLRE- HABILITATION) 6585 SH�37 2303 SH�3384 (OCCUPATIONAL & VO- 812 SH�3700 (SPORT PSYCHOLOGY & LEI- CA TIONAL REHABILITA- SURE) TION) 3869 SH�3720 (SPORTS) 1839 SH � 3385 (SPEECH & LANGUAGE 1904 SH�3740 (RECREATION& LEISURE) THERAPy) 4460 SH � 3386 (CRIMINALREHABILIT A- 8868 SH�38 TION & PENOLOGY) 8868 SH�3800 (MILITARY PSYCHOLOGY) 43906 SH�34 19736 SH�3400 (PROFESSIONAL PSYCHO- 7371 SH�39 LOGICAL & HEALTH PER 1294 SH�3900 (CONSUMER PSYCHOLOGY) 13229 SH�341O (pROFESSIONAL EDUCA- 3103 SH�3920 (CONSUMER ATTITUDES & TION & TRAINING) BEHAVIOR) 6275 SH�3430 (pROFESSIONAL PERSON- 2974 SH � 3940 (MARKETING & ADVERTIS- NEL ATTITUDES & CHARAC- ING) TERISTICS 4409 SH�3450 (pROFESSIONALETHICS & 13314 SH�40 STANDARDS & LIABILITY 4826 SH�4000 (ENGINEERING & ENVI- 258 SH � 3470 (IMPAIRED PROFESSION- RONMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY) ALS) 3712 SH�4010 (HUMAN FACTORS ENGI- NEERING) 160363 SH�35 373 SH � 4030 (LIFESPACE& INSTITU- 60406 SH�3500 (EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOL- TIONAL DESIGN) OGY) 374 SH�4050 (COMMUNITY & ENVI- 16100 SH�3510 (EDUCATIONAL ADMINI- RONMENTAL PLANNING) STRA TION & PERSONNEL) 2032 SH�4070 (ENVIRONMENTALISSUES 27191 SH�3530 (CURRICULUM & PRO- & ATTITUDES) GRAMS & TEACHING 2002 SH�4090 (TRANSPORTATION) METHOD 14931 SH � 3550 (ACADEMIC LEARNING & 5206 SH�41 ACHIEVEMEN1) 978 SH�4100 (INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS) 16276 SH�3560 (CLASSROOM DYNAMICS & 2226 SH�4120 (ARTIFICIAL INTELLI- STUDENT ADJUSTMENT GENCE & EXPERT SYSTEM 17250 SH�3570 (SPECIAL & REMEDIAL 215 SH�4140 (ROBOTICS) EDUCATION) 1787 SH � 4160 (NEURAL NETWORKS) 2058 SH�3575 (GIFTED & TALENTED) 6171 SH�3580 (EDUCA- 11550 SH�42 TIONALIVOCATIONAL 4018 SH�4200 (FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY & COUNSELING & STU LEGAL ISSUES) 2309 SH�4210 (CIVIL RIGHTS & CML LAW) 70527 SH�36 3350 SH�4230 (CRIMINAL LAW & ADJU- 32521 SH�3600 (INDUSTRIAL & ORGANIZA- DICATION) TIONAL PSYCHOLOGY) 587 SH�4250 (MEDIATION& CONFLICT 5698 SH�361O (OCCUPATIONAL INTER- RESOLUTION) ESTS & GUIDANCE) 255 SH�4270 (CRIME PREVENTION) 5449 SH�3620 (pERSONNEL MANAGE- 1031 SH�4290 (pOLICE& LEGAL PERSON- MENT & SELECTION & NEL) TRAINING) 3579 SH�3630 (pERSONNEL EVALUATION &JOB PERFORMANCE) 7088 SH�3640 (MANAGEMENT & MAN- AGEMENT TRAINING) 7174 SH�3650 (pERSONNEL ATTITUDES & JOB SATISFACTION) 190 Know!. Org. 2S(1998)No.4 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Appendix 6b PSYCHOLOGICAL ABSTRACTS (1986). [81 Classes1

GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY PERSONALITY. Parapsychology PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL DISORDERS. History & Philosophies & Theories Mental Disorders Research Methods & Apparatus & Computer Applica­ tions Behavior Disorders & Antisocial Behavior Learning Disorders & Mental Retardation PSYCHOMETRICS Speech and Language Disorders Physical Psychosomatic Disorders. Test Construction & Validation & Statistics & Mathematics TREATMENT AND PREVENTION. EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY (HUMAN). Psychotherapy & Psychotherapeucic counseling. Group & Family Therapy. Perception & Motor Processes Visual Perception Encounter Group & Sensivity & Human Rela­ tions Training. Auditory & Speech Perception Cognitive Processes Behavior Therapy & Behavior Modification. Drug Therapy. Learning & Memory Motivation and Emotion Hypnotherapy. Speech Therapy. Attention & Consciousness States Health Care Services. EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY(ANIMAL). Community Services & Mental Health Programs Counseling Social Casework. Learning& Motivation & Hospital Programs Institutionalization. Social & Instinctive Behavior & Rehabilitation & Penology. PHYSIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY. Drug & Alcohol Rehabilitation, Neurology & Electrophysiology PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL AND PROFESSIONAL Physiological Processes Psychophysiology ISSUES.

PHYSIOLOGICAL INTERVENTION EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY. Electrical Stimulation Educational Administration & Personnel & Training. Lessions Curriculum & Programs & Teaching Methods, Academic Learning Achievement. Drug Stimulation & Psychopharmacology & Classroom Dynamics & Student Adjustment & Atti­ COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS tudes. Language and Speech Special & Remedial Education. Literature and Art Counseling & Measurement. DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY. Cognitive & Perceptual Development Occupational Attitudes & Interests & Guidance, Psychosocial & Personality Development Personnel Selection & Training. Personnel Evaluation & Performance. SOCIAL PROCESSES AND SOCIAL ISSUES. Management & Management Training. Social Structure & Social Roles. Organizational Behavior & Job Satisfaction. Culture & Ethnology & Religion. Human Factors Engineering. Marriage & Family Environmental Psychology & Environmental Issues. Political & Legal Processes Marketing & Advertising. Psychosexual Behavior & Sex Roles. Drug & Alcohol Usage.

EXPERIMENTALSOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY. Group & Interpersonal Processes. Social Perception & Motivation. Know!. Org. 2S(1998)No.4 191 B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology

Appendix 7 Classification of Psychology (52 classes) (Hjorland, 1980)

A: Psychology in general !' Clinical psychology/Psychiatry (w ith community psy. A1: History, biography and geography of psychology chology) A2: Methods, statistics etc. J1: Psychopathology and psychodiagnostics (with con· A3: Philosophy and Theory of science crete syndroms, including drug abuse) A4: Psychological approaches J2: Therapy A4.1: Behaviorism J3: Child and adolescent clinical psychology/psychiatry A4.2: Psychoanalysis A4.3: Humanistic psychology K: Medical psychology, somatopsychology, etc. A4.4: Dialectical materialism L: Other areas of applied psychology and specialpsy cholo· B: Neuropsychology, genetics, and psychochemistry gles U: Criminal psychology Co Comparative psychology L2: Economic Psychology, advertising L3: Sports· and recreational psychology D: Psychological/tlllctions in general L4: Aestetical psychology and arts (with literature, mu- D1: Consciousness, sleeping, dreaming etc. sic & picture) D2: Perception and psychophysics L5: Political and historical psychology 03: Learning and memory L6: Traffic psychology D4: Thinking L7: Environmental psychology (town and home envi­ D5: Psychology of language ronment, noise etc) D6: Motivation, emotion, acts L8: Psychology of religion D6.1: Psychology of sexuality L9: Military psychology

E: Psychology of personality;Diff erential psychology. M- Parapsychology (w ith meditation and yoga) Psychological tests El: Psychology of women N Other Subjects

F: Developmental psychology F1: Children (including pregnancy, birth, child-parent relations etc.) F2: Psychology of youth F3: Adult development F4: Psychogerontology (including the psychology of death)

G: SocialPsychology G 1: Family psychology G2: Cultural psychology

H' Psychology of work and organizational psychology H1: Organizational psychology H2: Psychology of unemployment H3: Ergonomics

I: Educational Psychology 11: Special education 192 Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Notes 6. I consider classifications made without any explicit meth­ 1. This paper is not about the psychology of classification, odology, just based on the view or horizon of the persons which is a major subject in cognitive psychology. who are doing the classification to be "subjective" beclUse they do not apply the public knowledge. Therefore they 2. As a contribution to LIS this article could be seen as an tend to reflect specific persons view (or perhaps a wide­ example of what I have earlier named "domain analysis" spread ideology) rather than the public or scientific view (Hj0rland & Albrechtsen, 1995). This paper concentrates revealed by scholarly/scientific studies. on just one aspect of such an meaning of "pragmatism" with the view developed by the facet analytical tradition (e.g., Mills, 1957; Vickery, pragmatic philosophers, such as Charles Sanders Peirce or 1960). John Dewey around the beginning of the 20th cemury. 3. J0rgensen (1963) is another exception from this general 7. The most influential classification of mental disorders is tendency. In this work J0rgensen suggested a very schol­ Diagmostic and Statistical ManllaL of Mental Disorders arly classification of psychological phenomena based on a (DSM) published by American Psychiatric Association. combination of behavioral, phenomenological, and Its 4th edition (DSM-IV) is from 1994. This system is physiological criteria. Jmgensen was both a leading per­ widely recognized and debated in the literature (214 son in the movement of logical positivism and also a book reviews in Social Sciences Citation Index and Marxist. In my opinion these two influences can both be 10.692 entries in the PsyclNFO database.) This system traced in J0rgensen's original definition and cbssific\tion is mainly based on an empirical epistemology and has of psychology, and they are in conflict (in a way postu­ been discussed by people informed by other lated by me, but not clear to himselQ. As logical positiv­ epistemologies. ist/empiricist Jmgensen could only accept things that can be observed. Therefore he defined the human psyche by 8. However, it is done in different ways, and epistemological observational criteria. As a Marxist he was influenced by trends in the sciences do affect the use of classificatory scientific realism and looked after mechanisms behind methods, and even the attitude towards the relevance of what is observed. It is, however, outside the scope of this classifying at all. According to Kuiken, Wild & Schopf­ article to discuss his proposal for the classification of psy­ locher [11) positivism has had negative influence on chology. Jmgensen's interest in classification in a period classification in the sciences. of time where the general interest in classification was 9. Classification theory may find itself in a situation very low, can partly be explained by the fact that he was a phi­ similar to that of lexicography. Eco (1984, p. 68) shows losopher, and not a psychologist. There was (and still is) a how the idea of a dictionary runs into theoretical difficul­ certain division of labor between psychology as an em­ ties: "The tree of genera and species, the tree of sub­ pirical science and (mental) philosophy as a theoretical stances, blows up in a dust of differentiae, in a turmoil of SClence. infinite accidents, in a nonhierarchial network of qualitt. 4. Whitley (1984) is an example of an important sociological The dictionary is dissolved into a potentially unordered contribution. and unrestricted galaxy of pieces of world knowledge. The dictionary thus becomes an encyclopedia, because it s. 1£ is outside the scope of this article to discuss the concept was in fact a disguised encyclopedia." (Emphasis in origi­ of classification itself. However, two recent contributions nal). should be mentioned: On p. 84 he writes: "Such a notion of encyclopedia does Adams & Adams (1991) differentiate between classifica­ not deny the existence of structured knowledge; it only tion and ta.xonomy. They see a taxonomy as a special kind suggests that such a knowledge cannot be recognized and of classification with specific hierarchical characteristics, a organized as a global system; it provides only "local" cul­ classification in which smaller and more specific classes or tural organizations; every attempt to recognize these local taxa (singular: taxon) are grouped to bigger and more gen­ organizations as unique and "global" - ignoring their par­ eral ditto. A typology they conceive as a form of classifica­ tiality - produces an ideological bias. tion which is specially designed with the aim of sorting The Porphyrian tree tried to tame the labyrinth. It did the elements in mutually exclusive categories called types. not succeed because it could not, but many contemporary Jacob (1991, 1994) finds that categorization is the funda­ theories of language are still trying to revive this impossi­ mental cognitive tool that facilitates the organization, ble dream". (Emphasis in original). storage and retrieval of information. Traditional classifica­ And, one could add that almost all contemporary theories tion is an arbitrary and artificial tool that is used to struc­ on information retrieval and knowledge organization - in ture a specific knowledge domain while ensuring consis­ building on empirism or rationalism - are also trying to tency and stability of meaning. Because a classificatory revive the same impossible dream. structure serves to identify relationships between entities and to set the boundaries for a specific area of inquiry, it 10. About the etymology of the term "psychology" see establishes a worldview that limits the recognition of simi­ Lapointe, 1973 and Vandekemp, 1980 & 1983. larities. To encourage dialogue across disciplinary 11. Many different terms can be used as a label to describe the boundaries, the specificity of meaning inherent in the same subject area. Examples are "psychology", "the study classificatory structure must be replaced by more general of the soul", "the science of consciousness", "psychoanaly­ meanings that function across disciplines. sis", "the science of behavior", "cognitive science", "the Know!. Org. 2S(1998)No.4 193 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

science of the mental", "the study of subjectivity", "per­ and excluded from psychology. In order to argue what sanoIogy", or "microsociology". If they are used about should be excluded from psychology the theory must be the same subject area, they are semantically synonymous. able to explain where these phenomena belong in the uni­ However, the definition of psychology is really difficult verse of knowledge. Its theory about the domain of psy­ because it is not given that they refer to the same knowl­ chology must not only imply a classification of what is edge field. They represent more or less different or identi­ regarded as psychological phenomena according to the cal views on man, which imply more or less different Of theory itself, but it should also be able to classify phe­ identical subject dom;ains. The question about the syn­ nomena which other theories regard as psychological onymity of those terms is therefore not objective or a pri­ phenomena. ory, but a theoretical question depending on the devel­ In my view, the ontological and epistemological theories opment of the theories about psychology. are the basic theories, which can be used as psychological Also the term "psychology" has not one meaning but meta theories to produce the basic outline of a classifica­ many meanings. The use of the term is theory laden. For tion of psychological knowledge. This view is, however, example, some users of the term psychology are more re­ itself a theory which is opposed to the ami-meta­ lated to the study of physiological processes, while others physicalism of empiricism and positivism. are more related to the study of personality processes 12. Aristotle was of the opinion that the book "De anima" from a more sociological point of view. The philosopher treated the most important of all subjects. of science Dudley Shapere (1984) writes about "domains": 13. The psychological systematization presupposes some "Although in more primitive stages of science (or, perhaps philosophical clarifications of the nature of psychological better, of what will become a science), obvious sensory phenomena and the psycho-physical problem. Do psycho­ similarities or general presuppositions usually determine logical phenomena only exist in man (called "anthropo­ whether certain items of experience will be considered as psychism") as, for example, Descartes thought, or - to forming a body or domain, this less and less true as sci­ take the opposite extreme theory - is the whole world, ence progresses (or, as one might say, as it becomes more including non-living objects, endowed with spirit (called unambiguously scientific). As part of the growing sophis­ "panpsychism") or do psychological phenomena only ex­ tication of science, such associations of items are subjected ist in living beings (called "biopsychism")? Or do they to criticism, and are orren revised on the basis of consid­ only exist in certain higher animals? erations, which are far from obvious and na·ive. Differ­ ences, which seemed to distinguish items from one an­ 111e Psycho-Physical Problem ('111e Mind-Body Problem) other are concluded to be superficial; similarities which MONISTIC DUALISTIC PLURALISTIC were previously unrecognized, or, if recognized, consid­ THEORIES THEORIES THEORIES ered superficial, become fundamentaL Conversely, simi­ Materialistic theories The Theory of In· Karl Popper & larities, which formerly served as bases for association of (Karl Marx, John B. teraction J.Ecdes "Three items come (0 be considered superficial, and the items \Y/atson�-) (Descartes) Worlds" formerly associated are no longer, and form independent Spiritualistic or ide- The Theory of Par- groupings or come to be associated with other groups. alistic theories allelism The items themselves orren, in the process, come to be re­ (Berkeley) (Leibnitz) described, orren, for scientific purposes, in very unfamiliar The theory of Iden­ The Epiphenome­ Karl Pribram ways". (Shapere, 1984, p. 323). tity (Spinoza) nological Theory This is important because it implies that the classification (P,vlov) of knowledge domains cannot be done independently of the claims or views of the knowledge in the domain ".. as (According to Tolman (1992) John B. Watson and the be­ science proceeds, the connection between knowledge-claims, haviorism he founded were not materialistic, but phe­ domain groupings, and descriptions {a nd often naming} tend nomenologistic and hence philosophically idealistic. This to become tighter and tighter" (Shapere, 1984, p. 324). view is connected to an important distinction between According to Shapere, domains are bodies of subject­ empiricism/positivism on the one side and scientific real­ matter that have become delineated by the way in which ism on the other. Empiricism/positivism tries to base all the history of scientific methodology, theory and discov­ knowledge on sense impressions and to avoid any "meta­ ery has developed over many centuries, and even at a ma­ physical" assumptions. Sense impressions are, however, ture stage they are in a process of constant refinement and purely subjective, and without language to ensure the ob­ occasional wholesale reordering and unification. There jectivity of observations empiricism cannot avoid the ide­ seems to be a long term tendency to develop more com­ alistic trap). prehensive theories which unite domains of subject mat­ Immanuel Kant put forward a classical categorization of ter. psychological phenomena in his book "Kritik der The definition of psychology therefore cannot be made Urtheilskraft" (1790), in which he divided psychical phe­ from etymological studies alone, but requires a theory nomena into "Erkenntnisvermogen" (Cognition), "Gefiihl about the domain which the term is meant to cover. Such der Lust und Unlust" (Emotion) and "Begehrungsver­ a theory should be able to explain what is to be included mogen" (Motivation). Different psychological theories and what is to be excluded from psychology. have attempted to reduce these phenomena to one. Dif­ A theory about the classification of psychology must de­ ferent psychological approaches tend to overestimate the velop a metatheory of what is by different views included importance of some processes at the expense of others. 194 Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology

For example, psychoanalysis tends to overestimate mmi­ chology". Psychoanalysis (founded by Sigmund Freud varian, while cognitivism tends to overestimate the role of around 1900) was not part of academic psychology for

chology" (e .g.• by Wundt) cognition, emotion and moti­ therapy. vation were regarded as a microcosmos, a world closed on One indication of the historical impact of a field of itself, apan from bodily phenomena (based on the dual­ knowledge such as psychoanalysis on academia is the ism of Decanes). It was thought that self-observation (in­ number of dissertations written with that approach. In trospection) could be used to uncover the basic elements Denmark a dissertation by Lise 0stergaard from 1959 is of consciousness, the special psychical "matter", the first one that documents the acceptance of the psy­ Leomjev writes: "The classical rationalistic psychology choanalytic viewpoint in academic psychology. was as an attempt to uncover our psychical world, the Another indication of the relationship between academic world of our ideas, our emotions and our thought, and and non-academic knowledge is the system of journals. here find the laws which express its nature. They believed Psychoanalytic contributions can, for example, be found that they only had to observe and come to terms with the in academic psychological journals, as well as in academic fluctuating and unclear subjective psychical experiences in medical journals (as well as other disciplines such as phi­ a sufficiently rational and careful way in order to find the losophy and literature). The core set of psychoanalytic laws and causes which govern the "small world" of our journals are, however, not affiliated with any academic consciousness. This could be done in the same way as the discipline, but are connected to psychoanalytic societies in observation of the stars had let humankind to the discov­ different countries. It is a characteristic of the relation be­ eries of the laws that govern the physical universe, the tween academic mainstream and psychoanalysis that the "big world". American Psychological Association did not establish a This psychological idea was never realized, and in fact can psychoanalytically oriented journal until 1984 (Psycho­ never be realized. The world of our consciousness has no analytic Psychology, sponsor: American Psychological resemblance with the world of the planets. You cannot Association, Division of Psychoanalysis). By the way it is consider consciousness a closed existence in itself and only sponsored, not like many other journals published, search for independent connections in it. They do not ex­ by the American Psychological Association (which repre­ ist. If you talk about "spiritual movements" or "spiritual sents members educated in psychology at the universities). forces" then you are just using simple metaphors. The ex­ 17. Wundt himself - physician and physiologist by education pressions of consciousness are always connected to one - also regarded experimental psychology as a very limited thing or another and reflect something. Therefore there area of psychology. He wrote a major work "Volkerpsy­ does neither exist a physics of conscious expressions nor a chologie" (vol. 1-10) based 011 more humanistic methods, mathematics of ideas or a geometrical or pure form of the and he did not want that psychology should become "an spirit. The expressions of our consciousness are always de­ independent discipline", but he wanted it as part of phi­ terminated by the external reality of objects, which is re­ losophy with close connections to other humanistic disci­ flected in it". (Leontjev, 1977, p. 86; my translation). plines. He had, however, started a process which he him­ It is not until the development of the functionalistic and self could not control. Psychology became an independ­ behaviouristic approach that psychology relates con­ ent field of study partly as a result of the competition for sciousness to behavior and acts to the body and to the ad­ jobs, and partly because of the development of anti­ aptation of the individual to his/her environment (d., psychologistic tendecies in philosophy itself (see Danzi­ Jarosjevski, 1980). This is one reason why categories like ger, 1990, p. 41). behavior, acting and activity are missing in the classical 18. [Danziger underlines the discipline's tendency to annex tripartirion (cognition/emotion/motivation). new areas such as educational psychology, which existed 14. To say that psychology became split is slightly wrong, be­ before the formal establishing of psychology as a science. cause a split between, for example, biological and socio­ One may ask: Where did these areas come from? How did logical conceptions of psychological phenomena is already they arise as parts of human discourses? How did man be­ visible in the works of Aristotle. come an object of research? In asking such questions, the 15. The reason that is seldom explicated very well that differ­ research done by Michel Foucault is extremely relevant ent approaches to psychology imply different views of (e.g., Foucault, 1967, 1970, 1972, 1973, 1976, 1977, 1978)] subject matter and classification is that each approach 19. Danziger has here a note 1: "More recently, the category tends to consider itself the only real scientific approach, of "cognition" has played a similar role. The idea of ab­ and that psychology as a new empirical science discon­ stract laws uniting many domains of psychological func­ nected from philosophy tended to make all such questions tioning, irrespective of content, reappeared in the form of merely empirical questions. the category of "cognition" just when "learning" could no 16. The formal establishment of psychology as a science was longer play this role effectively. But this development falls done in universities. First in Leipzig, and very soon in all outside the time period of this book" (Danziger, 1997, p. major universities in the rest of the world. When a disci­ 108). pline is established at a university it becomes both an area 20. In an earlier book Danziger reveals a slightly different of research and of teaching. The kind of psychology, view on the possibility of establishing realistic psycho­ which is taught at universities is called "academic psy- logical categories: Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 195 B. Hj0rbnd: The Classification of Psychology

"One thing that has emerged from rhe historical analysis at anxiety as a defect in the br

cnce would be a rather vulgar interpretation of pr

My major result was that the meaning of the terms varies Braun, C. M. J. & Baribeau, J. M. C. (1984): The Clas­ with the philosophical view in the sciences. Within the sification of Psychology Among the Sciences from dominant empiristic view a general discipline is seen re­ Francis Bacon to Boniface Kedrov. Journalof Mind ductionistic, as the part of the discipline which was con­ and Behavior, 5(3), 245-259. sidered foundational. Thus general psychology meant Broclee, B. (1980). Wissenschaftstheoretische Grundla­ physiological psychology, general physiology meant genprobleme der Angewandten Psychologic. Das chemical physiology, -and gener-al sociology meant psy­ chosociology. Within a non-reductionistic view, however, Abgrenzungs-, Konstituenten- und Fundierbar� a general discipline means the part of the discipline in keitsproblem. Zeitschrifi jilr Sozialpsychologie, 11, which its general principles are formulated. At the Uni­ 207-224. versity of Copenhagen (and elsewhere?) the term "Gen­ Bry, l. & Afflerbach, L. (1968): In search of an organ­ eral psychology" has been considered a subdiscipline of izing principle for the behavioral science literature. psychology. As such it is not identical with experimental Commllnity Mental Health jO llrnal, 4(1) , 75-84. psychology or physiologically oriented psychology bur is Burne, A. (1995). Behaviourism. In S. Guttenplan supposed to formulate the basic principles of psychology (Ed.), A companion to the philosophy of mind (pp. spanning both biological and sociological views. Leon­ 132-140). Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishers. tievs' (1977) general psychology is an influential example (Blackwell Companions to Philosophy). of this last meaning. Chafetz, M.D. (1986). Taxonomy in Psychology: Looking for Subatomic Units. 7JJejournal of Psy­ chology, 120(2), 121-135. References and Selected Bibliography: Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the sllbject. Historical origins of psychological research. Cambridge: Cam­ Adams, J. C. (1999). Principles of classification (nor­ bridge University Press. mative, geographic, ethnographic, linguistic, phi­ Danziger, K. (1997). Na ming the Mind. Ho w Psychology losophica, phenomenological and other). In: Relig­ Fo und its Language. London: SAGE. ions, the study and classification of. Britannica® Dewey, J. (1948). Reconstruction in philosophy. (En­ CD 99 Mllitimedia Edition. Chicago, II.: Encyclo­ larged ed.). New York: Beacon. (Original work paedia Britannica, Inc., © 1994-1999. published 1920) Adams, W. Y. & Adams, E. W. (1991). Archaeological Diagnostic and Statistical Manllal of Mental Disorders: typology and practical reality. A dialectical approach DSM-IV. 4th ed. (1994). Washington, D. c.: to artifact classification and sorting. Cambridge: American Psychiatric Association. Cambridge University Press. Dreger, R. M. (1968). Aristotle, Linnaeus, and Lewin, Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A Psychological In­ or the Place of Classification in the Evaluative­ terpretation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Therapeutic Process. jo urnalof General Psychology, Winston. 78(1),41-59. Andersen, N. 0., Arnberg, J., Thoring Hansen, J., & Dubois, D. (1994). Identity and Autonomy of Psy­ Marcussen, L. (1983). Erkendelsesteori og videns· chology in Cognitive Sciences: Some Remarks klassifikation. K0benhavn: Danmarks Bibliotcks­ from Language Processing and Knowledge Repre­ skole, 1983. (D anmarks Biblioteksskoles A4-serie sentation. World Fu tures, 42, 71-78. nr. 23) Eco, U. (1984). Semiotics and the Philosophy of Lan· Anderson, J. R. (1983). 77Je Architectllre of Cognition. gllage. London: The MacMillan Press Ltd. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fiedler, F. (1990). Klassifikation der Wissenschaften. Andkjxr Olsen, o. & K"ppe, S. (1996): Psykoanalysen In Sandkiihler, H. J. (Ed.). Europaische Enzyklo­ efi a Frelld. Bind 1-2. K"benhavn: Gyldendal. padie zu Philosophie lind Wissenschafien Band 1·4 Asendorpf, J. (1991). Die differentielle Sichtweise in der (Band 2 pp. 812-515). Hamburg: Felix Meiner Ver­ Psychologie. Gottingen: Verlag fiir Psychologie. lag. Baldwin, J. M. (1901). A Scheme of Classification for Fiske, D. W. (1991). Macropsychology and micropsy­ Psychology. Princton Co ntributions to Psycbology, chology: natural categories and natutral kinds. (In: 3(1), 16-19. R.E. Snow and D. E. Wiley (eds.), Improving in� Balmer, H. et a!. (Ed.) (1976-1981). Die Psychologie des qlliry in Social Science. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. pp. 20.jahrlmnderts. Zurich: Kindler. 61-74). Battan, L. J. (1999). Approaches to climatic classifica­ Foucault, M. (1967). Ma dness and civilization: a history tion. Genetic classifications. Empiric classifica­ of insanity in the Age of Reason. London: Tavistock tions. In: Climate and weather. Britannica ® CD 99 Publications. (Translated from: Folie et deraisonj Mllitimedza Edition. Chicago, II.: Encyclopaedia histoire de la folie a l'age classique. Paris: PIon, Britannica, Inc., © 1994-1999. 1961). 198 Know!. Org. 25(1998)NoA B. Hj0fland: The Classification of Psychology

Foucault, M. (1970). 17Je order of things; an archaeology Howarth, C. I. (Ed.) & Gillham, W. E. (Ed.). (1981). of the human sciences. London: Tavistock Publica­ 77Je Structllre of Psychology: An In troductory Te xt. tions. (Translated from "Les mots et Ies chosesj Routledge Chapman & Hall. une archeologie des sciences humaines". Paris, Gal­ Guilford, J. P. (1967). 77Je Na ture of Human Intelli­ limard, 1966) gence. New York: McGrawhill. Foucault, M. (1972). 17Je archaeology of knowledge. Guilford, ]. P. (1982). Cognitive psychology's ambi­ New York, Pantheon Books. (Translated from the guities: Some suggested remedies. Psychological Re­ French by A. M. Sheridan Smith from: "L'arche­ view, 89, 48-59. ologie du savoir". Paris: Gallimard, 1969). Hj0rland, Birger (1980). Classification Scheme devel­ Foucault, M. (1973). 17Je birth of the clinic; an archae­ oped fo r "Psykologisk lilleratur i danske fo rsknings­ ology of medical perception. New York: Pantheon. biblioteker" (psychological literature in Danish Re­ (Translated from the French by A. M. Sheridan search Libraries). Copenhagen: The Royal Library, Smith from "Naissance de la clinique; une arche­ 1980. (Translated from Danish). ologie du regard medical. Paris, Presses universi­ Hj0rland, B. (1982). Hvad er aIm en psykologi? (What taires de France, 1963). is general psychology?) Psyke & Logos, 3, 377-385. Foucault, M. (1976). Me ntal illness and psychology. Hj0rland, B. (1988). Information Retrieval in Psy­ New York: Harper & Row, (Translated by Alan chology. Behavioral and Social Sciences Librarian, Sheridan from "Maladie mentale et psychologie" Vol 6 (3/4), 39-64. Paris: Presses universitaircs de France, 3.ed. 1966) Hj0rland, B. (1992). The concept of "subject" in In­ Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and Punish; the birth of formation Science. Jo urnal of Documentation, the prison. New York: Random House. (Transla­ 48(2), 172-200. tion of: Surveiller et punir; naissance de la prison. Hj0rland, B. (1997): Information Seeking and Subject [Paris] : Gallimard, 1975). Representation. An AClivity-77Jeoretical Approach to Foucault, M. (1978): 17Je history of sexllality vol. 1-3. Information Science. Westport, Conn. & London: New York: Pantheon Books. (Vol. 1. An introduc­ Greenwood Press. tion. Vol. 2. The use of pleasure. Vol. 3. The care Hj0rland, B. (1998a). Information Retrieval, Text of the self.) (Translation from: "Histoire de la sex­ Composition, and Semantics. Knowledge Organiza­ ualite". Paris: Gallimard, 1976. 1. La volonte de sa­ tion, 25(112), 16-31. voir. 2. L'usage des plaisirs. 3. Le souci de soi.) Hj0rland, B. (1998b). Theory and Metatheory of In­ Garfield, E. (1976). Social-Sciences Citation Index formation Science. A New Interpretation. Journal Clusters. Cllrrent Contents, N27, 5-11 of Documentation, 54(5), 606-621. Garfield, E. (1979). Citation Indexing: Its 17Jem) and Hj0rland, B. (1998c; IN PRESS): Review of Miksa Application in Science, Teclm ology, and l1umanities. (1998), journalof the American Society fo r Informa­ New York: John Wiley. tion Science. Garfield, E. (1992).: Psychology Research, 1986-1990 - Hj0rland, B. & Albrechtsen, H. (1995). Toward a A Citationist Perspective on the Highest Impact New Horizon in Information Science: Domain Papers, Institutions, and Authors. Current Con­ Analysis. journalof the American Society fo r Info r­ tents, V4 1, (OCT 12), 5-13 mation Science, 46(6), 400-425. Goody, J. (1987). 7;'e In te1ace Between the Written Hoffman, R. R. & Deffenbacher, K. A. (1994). Alter­ and the Oral. Cambridge: Cambridge University native schemes for the analysis of basic versus ap­ Press. plied science: Beauty is stil1 in the eye of the be­ Graumann, C.-F. et al. (Ed.).(1981-). Enzyclopadie der holder. Ecological Psychology, 6(2), 125-130. Psychologie Band 1-88. Giittingen: Verlag fur Psy­ Ingwersen, P. (1994). Polyrepresentation of informa­ chologie. tion needs and semantic entities: Elements of a Gregg, A. et al. (1970). The place of psychology in an cognitive theory for information retrieval interac­ ideal university: The report of the University tion. In ACMISIGIR -94 (pp. 101-110). London: Commission to advise on the future of psychology Springer. at Harvard. American Psychologist, 25(5), 391-420. Ingwersen, P. (1996). Cognitive perspectives of infor­ (Reproduces the 1947 report of the Harvard Com­ mation retrieval interaction: Elements of a cogni­ mission in the context of a contemporary discus­ tive IR theory. journal of Documentation, 52(1), sion of the place of psychology in the university). 3-50. Harre, R. (1991). Psychology. IN: Burkhardt, H, & Jacob, E. K. (1991). Classification and Categorization: Smith, B. (Eds.) Handbook of Metaphysics and On­ Drawing the Line. Advances in Classification Re­ tology. Vol 1-2, A-Z (Vol. II pp. 736-742). Munich, search. Vol. 2. Proceedings of the 2.nd. ASIS SIGICR Vienna: Philosophia Verlag. Classification Research Wo rkshop. Washington, Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 199 B. Hj0fland: The Classification of Psychology

D.C.: American Society for Information Science) rary Problems. New York & Berlin: Springer­ pp. 67-83. Verlag). Jacob, E. K. (1994). Classification and crossdiscipli­ Lapointe, F. H. (1973): Origin and evolution of the nary communication: Breaching the boundaries term psychology. Psychologia, 16(1), 1-16. imposed by classificatory structure. Advances in Leontjev, A. N. (1977): Problemer i det psykiskes IIdvik· Knowledge Organization, 4, 101-108. (Proceedings ling !-III. Kbh.: Rhodos. of the third international ISKO conference, 20-24 Leontyev, Aleksei Nikolaevich (1981). Problems of the June 1994, Copenhagen, Denmark). development of the mind. Tra nslated Fom Russian Jarosjevskij, M. G. (1980): Psykologien det fr om "Problemy razvitiia psikhiki." Moscow: Pro­ 20.arhllndrede. Psykologiens IIdvikling i Ellropa, gress. USA og Sovjetunionen. K0benhavn: Forum. Louttit, C. M. (1933). The Dewey decimal system and Jarosevskij, Michail Grigo'evic (1990) A history of psy. psychology. JOllrnal of General Ps ychology, 9, 234- cholog. Translated from the Russian by Ruth Eng­ 238. lish. Moscow : Progress Publishers. Louttit, C. M. (1941). Library classification for psy­ Johnson, D. M. & Erneling, C. E. (Eds.) (1997): 77Je chological literature. Psychological Record, 4, 350- Fllture of the Cognitive Revolution. Oxford: Oxford 364. University Press. Luriya, A. R. (1977). On the place of psychology in J0rgensen, J. (1963): Hovedtr",k af bevidsthedsy­ the social and biological sciences. (In Russian; tringernes klassifikation [Main outline of the clas­ translated title). Vop msy Filosofii, No 9, 68-76. sification of expressions of counsciousness] (Chap­ Madsen, K. B. (1975). Sy stematologi. Sammenlignende ter VIII+IX, pp. 189-242) In: J0rgen J0rgensen: videnskabsteori fo r psykologer og besla:gtedefa ggrup· Psykologi paa biologisk grundlag. Copenhagen: per. K0benhavn. Munksgaard. Mammen, J. (1993). The elements of psychology. Pp. Kant, E. (1790). Kritik der Urtheilskraft . (Translated by 29-44 in: Niels Engelsted; Mariane Hedegaard; J. Creed Meredith: The Critique of Judgement. Benny Karpatschof & Axel Mortensen (Eds.). The Oxford: Clarenton Press, 1969). Societal Subject. Arhus: Aarhus University Press. Karamuftuoglu, M. (1998). Knowledge Based Infonna. Mammen, J. (1998). The Psyche as "res extensa" (IN: lion Retrieval: A Semiotic Approacb. Thesis submit­ FOllrth Congress of the In ternational Society fo r Cui· ted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. De­ tural Research and Activity 77J eOlY (Jllne 7·11 1998 partment of Information Science, City University, Aarhlls, Denmark). Abstracts (pp. 449-450). Aarhus: London. Institute of Psychology. Kedrow, B. M. (1976). Klassifizierung der Wissenschaf Medical SlIbject Headings. Tree structllres (1998). Wash­ ten. Band 1·2, Koln: Pahl-Rugenstein. (Translated ington, D.C: National Library of Medicine. from Russian). [A third volume is mentioned in Miksa, F. (1998). 77JeDDC, the Universe of Knowledge, vol. 2] and the Post·Modern Libwy. Albany, NY: Forrest Kirk, B. A. (1958). Classifying the literature in coun­ Press. seling psychology. Journal of COllnseling Psychol. Mills, J. (1957). The Classification of a Subjetc Field ogy, 5, 89-97. (in: Proceedings of the International Study Con­ Krauth, J. (1981). Techniques of classification in psy­ ference on Classification for Information Retrieval chology I: factor analysis, facet analyses, multidi­ held at Beatrice Webb House, Dorking, England mensional scaling, latent structure analysis. Inter­ 13th-17th May 1957. - London: Aslib, p. 29-42.

national Classification, 8(3), 126-132. Mills, J. & Broughton, V _ (1977): Bliss Bibliographical Krauth, J. (1982). Techniques of classification in psy­ Classification. 2. ed. Introdllction and Allxillia>y chology 2: cluster analysis, typal analysis, configu­ Schedules. London: Butterworths. ral frequency analysis, discriminant analysis, re­ Mills, J. & Broughton, V. (1978): Bliss Bibliographical gression analysis. In ternational Classification, 9(1), Classification. 2. ed. Class I: Psychology and Psy· 1-10. chiatry. London: Butterworth. Kuhn, T. S. (1970): 77" structure of scientific revolll' Munday, E. (1979). When is a Child a "Child"? Alter­ tions (2rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago native Systems and Classification. JOllrnal of An­ Press. thropology Society of Oxfo rd, 10(3), 161-172. Kuiken, D., Wild, T. c., & Schopflocher, D. (1992): Needham, J. (1943). Integrative Levels: A Revaluation Positivist Conceptions of Induction and the Rejec­ of the Idea of Progress (1937 Herbert Spencer Lec­ tion of Classificatory Methods in Psychological ture, reprinted in: J.Needham: Time: the ReFeshing Research. (Pp. 47-56 In: Tolman, C. W. (Ed.): River. London. Positivism in Psycbology. Historical and Contempo- Ovesen, J. (1989). Classificare Necesse Est. Lidt om klassifikation i antropologien - og ogsa ellers. (i: 200 Know!. Org. 25(1998)No.4 B. Hj0rland: The Classification of Psychology

Orden i papirerne - en hilsen til JB. Friis·Hansen. Shapere, D. (1977). Scientific theories and their do­ Ed. by Ole Harbo and Leif Kajberg. Copenhagen: mains. In F. Suppe (Ed.), 17Je structure of scientific Danmarks Biblioteksskole. Pp. 117-122. theories (2rd ed., pp. 518-599). Urbana: University Pedersen, J. (1982). Concerning the main structure of of Illinois Press. a new schedule for psychology within the U niver� Shapere, D. (1984). Reason and the search fo r knowl­ sal Decimal Classification. International Fo rum In­ edge: Investigations in the philosophy of science (Bos­ fo rmation Documentation, 7, 16-21. ton Studies in the Philosophy of Science vol. 78). Platonov, K. K. & Mirimanova, M. S. (1983). The Ob­ Dordrecht: D. Reidel. ject-oriented Thesaurus in Psychology. Na llc!Jo­ Shapere, D. (1989). Evolution and continuity in scien­ Technicheskaya Informatsiya, Seriya 2, 17(3) , 14-18. tific change. Philosophy of Science, 56, 419-437. Poffenberger, A. T. (1917). A library classification for Soudek, M. (1980). On the classification of psychology books on psychology. Psy chological Bulletin, 14(9), in general library classification schemes. Library 328-331. Resollrces & Teclm ical Services, 24(2), 114-128. Poulsen, H. (1982). Leontjev, genspejlingsbegrebet og Soudek, M. (1983). The inadequate treatment of psy­ den almene psykologi. Kommentarer til Ole chology in general library classification schemes. Dreier og Benny Karpatschof. Psyke & Logos, 3, Canadian Psychology, 24(3), 181-189. 161-175 Thorne, F. C. (1964). Diagnostic classification and Rescher, N. (1979). Cognitive Systematization. A Sys­ nomenclature for psychological states. jOllrnal of tems-theoretic approach to a coherent them) of Clinical Psychology, 20(1), 3-60. knowledge. Oxford. Tolman, C. W. (1992): Watson's positivism: Material­ Rice, R. W. (1978). Formal Classification of Research ist or phenomenalist? In: C. W. Tolman (Ed.): Information. An Empirical Test of the McGrath­ Positivism in Psychology. Historical and Contempo· Altman Approach and an Illustrative Case. Ameri­ rary Problems, pp. 83-102. New York: Springer can Psychologist, 33, 249-264. Verlag. Rosenzweig, M. R. (1992). Unity and diversity of psy­ Tuttle, R. H. (1999). Taxonomy. The objectives of chology. International Association of Applied biological classification. In: The biological sciences. Psychology: The unity of psychology (1990, Britannica ® CD 99 Multimedia Edition. Chicago, Kyoto, Japan). Internationaljo urnal of Psychology, II.: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., © 1994-1999 27(5), 283-290. Vandekemp, H. (1980). Origin and Evolution of the Ruckmick, C. A. (1926). A schematic classification of Term Psychology - Addenda. American Psycholo­ general psychology. Psychological Review, 33, 397- gist, 35(8), p.774. (Note) 406. Vandekemp, H. (1983): A note on the term psychol­ Sams, T; Laursen, P; Eskelunen, L. (1994). Response ogy in English titles - predecessors of Rauch. jOllr­ Classification in Psychological Testing Using a nal of the history of the behavioral sciences, 19(2), p. Neural Network. International journal of Neural 185. Systems, 5(3),253-256 Vickery, B. C. (1960): Faceted Classification. A Gllide Samurin, E.!. (1967). Geschichte der bibliothekarisch­ to the Co nstruction and Use of Sp ecial Schemes. Lon­ bibliographischen Klassifikation. Band I-II. Mun­ don: ASLIB. chen: Verlag Dokumentation. (Translated from Walker, A. (Ed.). (1991). 17maurus of psychological in­ Russian). dex terms. 6th. ed. Washington, D.C.: American Scheerer, E. (1989). Psychologie. In: Historisches War­ Psychological Association. terbuch der Philosophie (Bd. 7, S. 1599-1653). Hrsg.: Warnke, C. (1972). Klassifikation der Wissenschaften. J. Ritter & K. Grunder. Darmstadt: Wissenschaft­ In: Klaus, G. & Buhr, M. (Eds). Ma rxistish-Lenini­ liche Buchgesellschaft. stisches Warterbuch der Philosophie. Neubearbeitete Schonpflug, W. (1993). Applied psychology: New­ und erweiterte Ausgabe (vol. 2, pp. 629-633). Rein­ comer with a long tradition. Applied Psychology: bek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag. An International Review, 42(1), 5-30. [This article White, H. D., & McCain, K. W. (1998). Visualizing a is debated by de Wolff; Landy; Louw; and Semmer discipline: An author co-citation analysis of infor­ in the same issue of the journal] mation science, 1972-1995. jo urnalof the American Schultz, D. P. & Schultz, S. E. (1996). A History of Society fo r Information Science, 49(4), 327-355. Modem Psychology. Sixth edition. Philadelphia: Whitley, R. D. (1984). Intellectual and social organiza­ Harcourt Brace College Publishers. tion of the sciences. Oxford: Clarendon. Schultz, E. (1988). Personlighedspsykologi pa erkendel­ Willoughby, R. R. (1932). A classification for psy­ sesteoretisk grundlag. Eller Mysteriet om personen der chology. journal of General Psychology, 7, 179-185. fo rsvandt. K"benhavn: Dansk Psykologisk Forlag. Know!. Org, 25(1998)NoA 201 B. Hjmland: The Classification of Psychology

Winograd, T., & Flores, F, (1986): Understanding Erratum computers and cognition: A new fo undation fo r de­ sign_ New York: Addison-Wesley, In my article in Knowledge Organization, (Hj0rland, 1998, p, 26) I quoted Smith (1981, p, 84) for fifteen Birger Hj0rland, Royal School of Library and Infor­ reasons why authors quote other documents. Smith, mation Science, Copenhagen, 6 Birketinget, DK-2300 however, is only a secondary source of this informa­ Copenhagen S,' email: [email protected] tion, The primary source is Garfield (1965, p,85), which I should have acknowledged in the article, (Un­

fortunately 1 I also made the same mistake in Hj0r­ land, 1997, p, 149-150), I am sorry, and the error is my solely responsibility. (By the way, a very important update of the problem on norms of citing behavior is Garfield, 1996),

References Garfield, G, (1965), Can citation indexing be auto­ mated? In Statistical AssociationMethods fo r Mecha­ nized Documentation. Symposium Proceedings, Washington, 1964, (National Bureau of Standards Miscellaneous, Publication, 269, ed by Mary E. Stevens, et aL, p, 189-192), Reprinted in Essays of an Information Scientist, voL 1, 1962-1973, p, 84-90, Also available on the Internet: http://165, 123.33,33!eugene _g arfield!essays! V1 p084y1962-73 ,pdf Garfield, G, (1996) When to cite, Library Quarterly, 66(4), 449-458, Also available on the Internet: http:// 165, 123 ,33.33!eugene _garfield! papers! libquart66(4 ) p449y 1996, pdf Hj0fland, B, (1997), Information Seeking and Subject Representation, An Activity-Theoretical Approach to In/ormation Science. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press. Hj0rland, B, (1998), Information Retrieval, Text Composition, and Semantics. Knowledge Organi­ zation, 25(112), 16-31. Smith, L. (1981), Citation Analysis, Library Trends, 30, 83-106,

Birger Hj0rland