Nora S. Newcombe is a professor of
psychology and James H. Glackin Distinguished Faculty Fellow at
Temple University. She received her PhD from Harvard in 1976
and was formerly on the faculty of Pennsylvania State
University. Her research on cognitive development is widely
recognized as innovative work that is integrative across
different theoretical viewpoints, methodologies and age groups
and that has launched new ways of thinking about spatial and
memory development. She is the author of numerous scholarly
chapters, articles and books, including "Making Space:
The Development of Spatial Representation and Reasoning"
(with Janellen Huttenlocher, MIT Press, 2000). Her research has
been supported by a consistent record of federal support and
has been recognized by a Cattell Fellowship, an invitation to
the Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin, the George A. Miller Award
for Outstanding Recent Article in General Psychology from
'APA Div. 1 (Society for General Psychology), the G.
Stanley Hall Lectureship from APA's Div. 2 (Society for
the Teaching of Psychology), a Master Lectureship for the
Society for Research in Child Development for 2005, and the
Paul W. Eberman Faculty Research Award from Temple University.
She is a fellow of Divs. 1, 3 (Experimental), 7
(Developmental) and 35 (Society for the Psychology of Women) of
APA, as well as a fellow of the American Psychological
Society and the American Association for the Advancement of
Science.
Dr. Newcombe has a distinguished record of
professional service, including serving on many grant review
panels at NSF and NIH, numerous editorial boards and on the
boards of various professional societies, including the
Psychonomic Society, the Cognitive Development Society and
Section J (Psychology) of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science. Within APA, she has served as Div.
7's representative on the Council of Representatives,
president of Div. 7 of APA, editor of the Journal of
Experimental Psychology: General and associate editor of Psychological
Bulletin, chair of the Council of Editors, and member and chair
of the Committee on Scientific Awards. She has given APA testimony
to Congress, as well as engaged in congressional visits and
briefings on issues of funding, representation of women in
science and preschool assessment.
Newcombe's candidate statement
The existence of a discipline called
psychology is widely taken for granted. At some level, most of
us assume that the organization of the world of knowledge will
remain as we have always known it. We also believe, without too
much reflection, that the relation of practice and science will
continue in the traditional way, a strained yet long-term
marriage that both partners have doubts about. But actually
there is good reason to believe that revolutionary changes are
underway. Managing these changes represents an exciting challenge
that APA is uniquely well-situated to
address. First, in an era of translational research, scientists must clarify the relation of their
work to questions that concern policy-makers and the public. The
best way to accomplish this goal is by forging dynamic new
connections between science and practice. The linkages between
the two communities can become more intimate than they have
previously been, and more clearly mutually beneficial. APA must provide the contexts in which dialogue can
occur and productive partnerships can be formed. Second, knowledge
is simultaneously becoming more specialized and more
interdisciplinary. Therefore, many scientists' allegiance
is no longer to the traditional discipline of psychology, and
therefore not to APA. APA must seek new ways to connect to its
science constituency, leading the way to a transformed psychology
by organizing the "big picture" activities that only an
overarching organization can offer. Third, in an increasingly
evidence-based environment, for both practice and education, APA
must build on what it has done recently, to delineate the most
appropriate ways in which to generate new kinds of evidence and
evidence on uncharted areas, as well as addressing what is best
done when evidence is unavailable yet decisions must nevertheless
be made.