It is argued here that while Helmreich's criticisms of mainstream social psychology are valid, his proposed remedy is not. The inadequacies of the field transcend methodology and, therefore, are not seriously confronted by new methodologies. The chief difficulty is that a preoccupation with scientific respectability has diverted us from those problems and phenomena that establish our identity as a discipline.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Coser, L.A.Presidential address: Two methods in search of substance. American Sociological Review, 1975, 40, 691-700.
2.
Deutsch, M. & Krauss, R.M.Theories in social psychology. New York: Basic Books, 1965
3.
Helmreich, R.Applied social psychology: The Unfulfilled Promise. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1975, 1548-560.
4.
Lewin, K. Field theory in social science. New York: Harper, 1951. Nagel, E. The structure of science. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1961.
5.
Sanford, N.Whatever happened to action research?Journal of Social Issues , 1970, 26(4), 3-24.
