This special issueopens in new window of American Psychologist seeks to further develop an architecture of public psychology. Guest Editors Asia A. Eaton, Patrick R. Grzanka, Michèle M. Schlehofer, and Linda Silka share their key takeaways.
What is the special issue about?
During the past few years, attention has increasingly been drawn to grave and long-term social and public health crises, from persistent structural racism to the opioid crisis to the global COVID-19 pandemic. In the face of lethal disinformation and public policies driven by politics rather than evidence, psychologists’ obligation to serve the public has never been so important. In spite of a general lack of training in collaborative approaches to science and public advocacy, individual scholars have worked with affected communities to create social change. However, these efforts have not been systematic or codified except in relatively isolated corners of the discipline. We and the authors of the articles in this special issue of American Psychologist propose that a public psychology paradigm is needed to shift the field’s focus from the individual researcher—and their career and work—to a truly publicly engaged science, in which the public is involved in all steps of the research process (e.g., as the originators and beneficiaries of everything psychologists do).
What is the significance of the issue?
This special issue is a modest attempt to further the development of an architecture of public psychology, expanding the definition and practice of psychology to include not just “the study of the mind and behavior” (American Psychological Association, n.d., Definition 1) but also its applications to human welfare. The articles in this issue describe public psychology efforts in four broad and overlapping domains: (a) centering social problems, (b) engaging diverse publics in knowledge creation, (c) communicating and democratizing psychological knowledge, and (d) rethinking what constitutes psychology. As such, they cover a wide range of topics, from conceptual and professional identity overhauls (Grzanka & Cole, 2021; Lewis, 2021), to training models (Crowly et al., 2021; Miles & Fassinger, 2021; Neville et al., 2021), to research and service practices (Flynn et al., 2021; Jacquez et al., 2021; Ozer et al., 2021; Raque-Bogdan et al., 2021).
Tell us about a few key takeaways.
As articulated in the introduction to the issue, there are four criteria for building a public psychology:
- Centering social problems: Psychological research, teaching, and service activities should engage with social problems by definition and design, not as potential consequences or future implications.
- Engaging diverse publics in knowledge creation: Academics should actively and democratically involve the public in their work, from development to dissemination.
- Communicating and democratizing psychological knowledge: Scholars should be public facing, engaging in public communications and collaborations.
- Rethinking what constitutes psychology: Practitioners and psychologists whose work lies primarily or fully in community settings, including health service providers and community psychologists working in practice settings, should be central to public psychology.
What are some practical implications of the articles featured in the issue?
First, to actualize a truly public psychology, the training of undergraduates and graduates must change to center social problems and incorporate Indigenous and community-based knowledge and needs, community-partnered methods, public communication training, and training in advocacy and public policy.
Second, the reward systems in the field have to change. For example, embracing and promoting psychology in the service of the public good require redesigning the concept of academic work to position public benefit as a central activity, product, and ideal rather than as an ancillary component or implication of research.
Third, foregrounding social problems in training and rebuilding incentive structures will necessitate larger scale changes to work settings, evaluation criteria, and funding mechanisms. Accordingly, we call on psychologists across the discipline to join those of us who are committed to the public psychology framework in advocating for systemic and institutional changes to support public-facing and publicly engaged work.
Note: This article is in the Core of Psychology topic area. View more articles in the Core of Psychology topic area.
Citations
American Psychological Association. (n.d.). Psychology. In APA dictionary of psychology. Retrieved February 8, 2022, from https://dictionary.apa.org/psychologyopens in new window
Eaton, A. A., Grzanka, P. R., Schlehofer, M. M., & Silka, L. (2021). Public psychology: Introduction to the special issue. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1209–1216. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000933opens in new window
Grzanka, P. R., & Cole, E. R. (2021). An argument for bad psychology: Disciplinary disruption, public engagement, and social transformation. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1334–1345. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000853opens in new window
Lewis, N. A., Jr. (2021). What counts as good science? How the battle for methodological legitimacy affects public psychology. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1323–1333. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000870opens in new window
Crowley, D. M., Scott, J. T., Long, E. C., Green, L., Giray, C., Gay, B., Israel, A., Storace, R., McCauley, M., & Donovan, M. (2021). Cultivating researcher-policymaker partnerships: A randomized controlled trial of a model for training public psychologists. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1307–1322. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000880opens in new window
Miles, J. R., & Fassinger, R. E. (2021). Creating a public psychology through a scientist-practitioner-advocate training model. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1232–1247. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000855opens in new window
Neville, H. A., Ruedas-Gracia, N., Lee, B. A., Ogunfemi, N., Maghsoodi, A. H., Mosley, D. V., LaFromboise, T. D., & Fine, M. (2021). The public psychology for liberation training model: A call to transform the discipline. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1248–1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000887opens in new window
Flynn, A. W. P., Domínguez, S., Jr., Jordan, R. A. S., Dyer, R. L., & Young, E. I. (2021). When the political is professional: Civil disobedience in psychology. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1217–1231. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000867opens in new window
Jacquez, F., Dutt, A., Manirambona, E., & Wright, B. (2021). Uniting liberatory and participatory approaches in public psychology with refugees. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1280–1292. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000835opens in new window
Ozer, E. J., Langhout, R. D., & Weinstein, R. S. (2021). Promoting institutional change to support public psychology: Innovations and challenges at the University of California. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1293–1306. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000877opens in new window
Raque, T. L., Mitchell, A. M., Coleman, M. N., Coleman, J. J., & Owen, J. (2021). Addressing racial equity in health psychology research: An application of the multicultural orientation framework. American Psychologist, 76(8), 1266–1279. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000888opens in new window
About the authors
Asia A. Eatonopens in new window, PhD is a feminist social psychologist and associate professor of psychology at Florida International University, where she directs the Power, Women, and Relationships (PWR) Lab. The PWR Lab explores how gender intersects with identities such as race, sexual orientation, and class to affect individuals’ access to and experience with power. Through quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods work, the lab’s researchers engage social and cultural psychological theories and methods to address real-world social problems in collaboration with local, state, and national organizations and institutions. Interested researchers may contact Eaton by emailopens in new window.
Patrick R. Grzankaopens in new window, PhD is an associate professor of psychology and chair of the Interdisciplinary Program in Women, Gender, and Sexuality at the University of Tennessee. He is an applied social issues researcher who studies systemic inequality at the nexus of race, gender, and sexuality. He is also a public intellectual and activist who works with community organizations throughout Tennessee to promote social justice. Grzanka is a fellow of APA Divisions 7 and 44 and the recipient of the 2018 Michele Alexander Early Career Award from the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. Interested researchers may contact Grzanka by emailopens in new window.
Michèle Schlehoferopens in new window, PhD is a professor in the Psychology Department at Salisbury University, a public institution that is part of the University System of Maryland. Her training is in applied community-based participatory action-research approaches. An experienced community organizer, she has worked on a myriad of public psychology projects, most recently advocacy efforts by, with, and for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning people. Interested researchers may contact Schlehofer by emailopens in new window.
Linda Silkaopens in new window, PhD is a senior fellow at the University of Maine’s Senator George J. Mitchell Center for Sustainability Solutions. She has worked extensively on public policy, advocacy, and community–university research partnerships through over three decades of her work as a social and community psychologist. An APA fellow, Silka currently serves as president of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. Interested researchers may contact Silka by emailopens in new window.