Indigenization and Development of the Discipline

Abstract

Surveys were conducted of the attitudes and opinions of Indian and Bangladeshi psychologists. A series of questions assessed their perceptions of the intellectual climate within universities, their research publication preferences and practices within both national and foreign journals, and the communality of their opinions regarding research priorities and practices within their national psychology. Differences between countries, and within-sample comparisons of psychologists with and without foreign experience and strong preferences to publish in foreign journals revealed some insights about the development of the discipline that may generalize to other developing countries. Strategies for overcoming the lack of a constructive intellectual climate, a major obstacle to discipline development in India and Bangladesh, are considered

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adair, J. G. (1989, June). Development of the discipline and its contribution to social development in developing countries. Invited address to the Interamerican Congress of Psychology, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Adair, J. G. (1992a, July). Research biases, intellectual style, and culture: Social psychological intrusions into cross-cultural research. In L. Eckensberger (Chair), On the social psychology of cross-cultural psychology. Symposium conducted at the International Congress of Cross-Cultural Psychology, Liege, Belgium.

Adair, J. G. (1992b). Empirical study of indigenization and development of the discipline in developing countries. In Innovations in cross-cultural psychology. (pp. 62-74). Amsterdan: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Adair, J. G. , & Davidson, R. (1984). Research activity in the social sciences: Funding, productivity and attitudes of university-based social scientists. Ottawa: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.

Adair, J. G. , Puhan, B. N. , & Vohra, N. (1993). Indigenization of psychology: Empirical assessment of progress in Indian research. International Journal ofPsychology, 28, 149-169.

Agarwal, K. G. (1975). Psychology or adaptology. Social Scientist, 1-5.

Atal, Y. (1981). Call for indigenization. International Social Science Journal, 33, 189-197.

Begum, H. A. (1990). Bangladesh. In G. Shouksmith & E. A. Shouksmith (Eds.), Psychology in Asia and the Pacific. (pp. 43-85). Bangkok: UNESCO.

Choudhuri, A. R. (1985). Practising Western science outside the West: Personal observations on the Indian scene. Social Studies of Science, 15, 475-505.

10.

Dalal, A. (1990). India In G. Shouksmith & E. A. Shouksmith (Eds.), Psychology in Asia and the Pacific. (pp. 87-136). Bangkok: UNESCO.

11.

Mitra, S. K. (Ed.). (1972). A survey of research in psychology. Bombay: Popular Prakashan.

12.

Moghaddam, R. (1987). Psychology in three worlds: As reflected by the crisis in social psychology and the move toward indigenous Third-World psychology. American Psychologist, 42, 912-920.

13.

Nandy, A. (1974). The nonparadigmatic crisis of Indian psychology: Reflections on a recipient culture of science. Indian Journal of Psychology, 49, 1-20.

14.

Pandey, J. (1988). Psychology in India: Trends emerging in the eighties. In J. Pandey (Ed.), Psychology in India: State of the art: Vol. 3. Organizational behaviour and mental health. (pp. 339-361). New Delhi: Sage.

15.

Pareek, U. (Ed.). (1980). A survey of research in psychology, 1971-1972. (Parts I & II). Bombay, India: Popular Prakashan.

16.

Sinha, D. (1986). Psychology in a Third-World country: The Indian experience. New Delhi Sage.