The purpose of the four position papers and the three commentaries on them is to discuss some relatively undeveloped historical, philosophical, and social–contextual issues that the authors discern in the APA and Canadian Psychological Association codes of ethics.
As valuable as they have been, codes of ethics are like all things psychological — imperfect constructions. Overall, the papers and commentaries identify gaps in the psychologists' codes of ethics, suggest points of moral resistance to conventional conceptions of ethics for psychology, and advocate alternative conceptions and practices of ethics and psychological science that might more directly reflect the moral goal of human emancipation than codes of ethics have done thus far.
Guest Editor
Table of contents
Introduction
Introduction to Ethics in Psychology: Historical and Philosophical Grounding
Pages 69–77
Walsh, Richard T. G.
Special Issue Articles
Are Psychological "Ethics Codes" Morally Oblique?
Pages 78–89
Teo, Thomas
Bending the Arc of North American Psychologists' Moral Universe Toward Communicative Ethics and Social Justice
Pages 90–102
Walsh, Richard T. G.
Neoliberalism and Psychological Ethics
Pages 103–116
Sugarman, Jeff
The Historical Boundedness of Psychological Knowledge and the Ethics of Shared Understandings
Pages 117–127
Stam, Henderikus J.
Commentaries
An Ethics of Engagement
Pages 128–131
Smythe, William E.
Personal Political Commentary on a Range of Visible and Invisible Ethical Challenges
Pages 132–134
Pullin, Wendy M.
Social Justice, Psychology, and Outdated Epistemologies: Commentary on Sugarman, Stam, Teo, and Walsh
Pages 135–139
O'Doherty, Kieran C.
