The 100 Most Eminent Psychologists of the 20Th Century
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Review of General Psychology Copyright 2002 by the Educational Publishing Foundation 2002, Vol. 6, No. 2, 139–152 1089-2680/02/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//1089-2680.6.2.139 The 100 Most Eminent Psychologists of the 20th Century Steven J. Haggbloom Renee Warnick, Jason E. Warnick, Western Kentucky University Vinessa K. Jones, Gary L. Yarbrough, Tenea M. Russell, Chris M. Borecky, Reagan McGahhey, John L. Powell III, Jamie Beavers, and Emmanuelle Monte Arkansas State University A rank-ordered list was constructed that reports the first 99 of the 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th century. Eminence was measured by scores on 3 quantitative variables and 3 qualitative variables. The quantitative variables were journal citation frequency, introductory psychology textbook citation frequency, and survey response frequency. The qualitative variables were National Academy of Sciences membership, election as American Psychological Association (APA) president or receipt of the APA Distinguished Scientific Contributions Award, and surname used as an eponym. The qualitative variables were quantified and combined with the other 3 quantitative variables to produce a composite score that was then used to construct a rank-ordered list of the most eminent psychologists of the 20th century. The discipline of psychology underwent a eve of the 21st century, the APA Monitor (“A remarkable transformation during the 20th cen- Century of Psychology,” 1999) published brief tury, a transformation that included a shift away biographical sketches of some of the more em- from the European-influenced philosophical inent contributors to that transformation. Mile- psychology of the late 19th century to the stones such as a new year, a new decade, or, in empirical, research-based, American-dominated this case, a new century seem inevitably to psychology of today (Simonton, 1992). On the prompt such retrospective appraisals of the most notable events or people of an era. With- out question, the psychologists mentioned in the APA Monitor retrospective qualify as eminent. Steven J. Haggbloom, Department of Psychology, West- Nevertheless, they represent a very small subset ern Kentucky University; Renee Warnick, Jason E. War- nick, Vinessa K. Jones, Gary L. Yarbrough, Tenea M. of the substantial number of 20th-century psy- Russell, Chris M. Borecky, Reagan McGahhey, John L. chologists who might be so regarded. More- Powell III, Jamie Beavers, and Emmanuelle Monte, De- over, such retrospectives tend to omit highly partment of Psychology and Counseling, Arkansas State eminent, and still very productive, contempo- University. rary psychologists. Renee Warnick is now at the Department of Neuro- science, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, The purpose of the present study was to pro- Canada; Gary L. Yarbrough is now at the Department of duce a more inclusive, rank-ordered list of the Psychology, University of Louisville; Tenea M. Russell is 100 most eminent psychologists of the 20th now at the Forrest School of Professional Psychology; Chris century. To produce any such list is a daunting M. Borecky is now at the Department of Psychology, Uni- versity of Illinois—Chicago. task fraught with a variety of difficulties, not the We thank the following individuals for their assistance least of which is to operationalize “eminence.” with this project: Amanda L. Bulger, Robyn P. Burch, Jane Moreover, any procedure for creating such a list C. Cullins, Kyla Emerson, Jason L. Houston, Lindsey K. will invite methodological criticism. Because Scarborough, Casey C. Schultz, Mariah J. Seydel, and Mat- thew N. Yount. We also appreciate the insightful comments these difficulties will probably not be addressed on a manuscript draft provided by David Saarnio, Lynn to everyone’s satisfaction, and because our list Howerton, and Dan Perlman. is certain to have omitted the names of many Correspondence concerning this article should be ad- great psychologists for whom one could make a dressed to Steven J. Haggbloom, Department of Psychol- ogy, 276 Tate Page Hall, Western Kentucky University, 1 compelling case for inclusion, we took a cue Big Red Way, Bowling Green, Kentucky 42101. E-mail: from Eugene Garfield (1977) and report only 99 [email protected] names. Hence, the reader’s best case for a psy- 139 140 HAGGBLOOM ET AL. chologist who should have made the list just tions on the same trick, each having, like a might be that last, 100th name that we have not single stick, a weak point. The entire perfor- reported. mance, however, like a bundle of sticks, is We think the most eminent list reported here much stronger than the individual tricks it com- will be inherently interesting to many psychol- prises. To adapt an aphorism from psychology, ogists. Beyond that, knowing who is eminent in the whole is stronger than its parts. The use of a discipline can serve a number of useful pur- multiple criteria yields a better measure of em- poses. James McKeen Cattell recognized nearly inence to the extent that the strength of the a century ago that the understanding of both “bundle” of measures compensates for the science and creativity would be advanced by the weaknesses of its components. study of who is eminent in science and why The variables that have been used to measure (e.g., Cattell, 1910). Exploring the contribution eminence in psychology include frequency of of psychological variables to scientific behav- citation in the professional journal literature ior, especially exemplary and eminent cases, is (e.g., Endler, Rushton, & Roediger, 1978; Gar- now the province of the psychology of science, field, 1978, 1992; Myers, 1970), frequency of an emerging companion discipline to the more citation in introduction to psychology textbooks familiar and well-established disciplines that (e.g., Gorenflo & McConnell, 1991; Kaess & study science, such as history of science and Bousfield, 1954; Knapp, 1985; Perlman, 1980; philosophy of science (see Feist & Gorman, Roeckelein, 1995), and surveys of professional 1998, for a detailed overview of the psychology opinion (e.g., Annin, Boring, & Watson, 1968; of science). For example, Simonton (1992), Coan & Zagona, 1962; Korn, Davis, & Davis, working from a list of 69 eminent American 1991). These measures yield quantitative or or- psychologists, created a profile of the “typical” dinal-level data that have been used to construct eminent American psychologist. Simonton (2000) rank-ordered lists. investigated the contribution of 54 eminent psy- Studies of eminence in psychology have also chologists’ methodological and theoretical ori- employed qualitative measures such as whether entations to the durability of their influence. It is a psychologist’s surname has come to be used our hope that the most eminent list reported here as an eponym (i.e., a psychological term such as will be a useful starting point for similar studies Pavlovian conditioning or Skinner box) to rep- in the psychology of science. Our list also has resent, for example, a theory, procedure, test, or potential uses for research in the history of apparatus (Roeckelein, 1972, 1996),1 and re- psychology and in the psychology classroom. ceipt of awards or other forms of honorary Some of those applications are discussed at the recognition. The latter include election to mem- end of this article. bership in the National Academy of Sciences Our procedures, and the resulting most emi- (NAS), receipt of the American Psychological nent list, differed from those of other studies of Association (APA) Distinguished Scientific eminence in psychology in some important re- spects. Foremost among these differences is the Contributions Award, and election to the APA fact that no other study has attempted to com- presidency (e.g., Over, 1981; Simonton, 1992). pile a rank-ordered list of the most eminent In the present study, we used all six of the psychologists that spans the entire 20th century. quantitative and qualitative variables just men- Another important difference is that most emi- tioned. Our operational definition of eminence nence studies have employed a single measure was a composite score on these variables. What of eminence. Eminence, however, is a complex, follows is a description of how each variable multidimensional concept not likely to be well was measured and how scores were combined reflected in any one measure. Therefore, we to yield a composite index that was then used to used a combination of three quantitative and construct a rank-ordered list of the 100 most three qualitative variables. eminent psychologists of the 20th century. We The use of multiple criteria to measure emi- then describe some of the characteristics of our nence should accomplish the equivalent of what statistician–magician Persi Diaconis (1978) 1 One can also count frequency of eponym usage to called the “bundle of sticks” phenomenon in obtain quantitative data from this measure (Roeckelein, magic. A magician may perform several varia- 1996). THE 100 MOST EMINENT PSYCHOLOGISTS 141 list and how it relates to other measures of chologists without necessarily excluding more eminence in psychology. contemporary psychologists. The terms psychologist and 20th century also It is our view that the JCL represents a rea- require definition. For present purposes, psy- sonable approach to achieving a degree of bal- chologist was not defined according to aca- ance between an emphasis on historically estab- demic degree (e.g., the PhD in psychology, lished authorities and contemporarily active PsyD, or a comparable degree).