In an American Psychologist article published in 1981, the author of the present contribution began a critique of the epistemic tenets of the traditional individual differences framework for personality research, which has long dominated the field. Though at first that article and others published soon thereafter generated some needed critical discourse within the discipline, mainstream investigative practices remain now just as they have long been, and, in the meantime, the critical discourse itself has largely ceased. In the present contribution, the author relates his attempts to understand these developments through historical research into the roots of mainstream thinking. Given the nature and depth of these roots, the continuing resistance to change within the mainstream is more readily understood. Nevertheless, it is argued, the need for such change remains, and it is observed that in the prevailing intellectual climate of the discipline, such change still does not appear imminent.
Allport, G.W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
2.
Allport, G.W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
3.
Angleitner, A. (1991). Personality psychology: Trends and developments . European Journal of Personality, 5, 185—197.
4.
Boneau, C.A. (1998). Hermann Ebbinghaus: On the road to progress or down the garden path? In G.A. Kimble & M. Wertheimer (Eds.), Portraits of pioneers in psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 51—64). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association ; Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
Brunswik, E. (1943). Organismic achievement and environmental probability . The Psychological Review, 50, 255—272.
6.
Buckle, H.T. (1898). A history of civilization in England (2nd London ed.). New York: Appleton. (Original work published 1857.)
7.
Bühring, G. (1996). William Stern oder Streben nach Einheit. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
8.
Campbell, D.T., & Fiske, D.W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin,56, 81—105.
9.
Carlson, R. (1971). Where is the person in personality research?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 203—214.
10.
Danziger, K. (1979). The positivistic repudiation of Wundt. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 15, 205—230.
11.
Danziger, K. (1987). Statistical method and the historical development of research practice in American psychology. In L. Krueger, G. Gigerenzer, & M.S. Morgan (Eds.), The probabilistic revolution: Ideas in the sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 35—47). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Dar, R., & Serlin, R.C. (1990). For whom the bell curve toils: Universality in individual differences research. In D.N. Robinson & L.P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 193—199). New York: Plenum.
14.
Digman, J.M. (1989). Five robust trait dimensions: Development, stability, and utility. Journal of Personality, 57, 195—214.
15.
Digman, J.M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model (Vol. 41). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews, Inc.
16.
Eysenck, H.J. (1990). Differential psychology before and after William Stern. Psychologische Beiträge, 32, 249—262.
17.
Goldberg, L.R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits . American Psychologist, 48, 26—34.
18.
Harré, R. (2006). Key thinkers in psychology. London: Sage.
19.
Harré, R., & Tissaw, M.A. (2005). Wittgenstein and psychology: A practical guide . Aldershot: Ashgate.
20.
Koch, S. (1985). Foreword: Wundt's creature at age zero — and as centenarian: Some aspects of the institutionalization of the `new psychology '. In S. Koch & D.E. Leary (Eds.), A century of psychology as science (pp. 7—35). New York: McGraw-Hill.
21.
Lamiell, J.T. (1981). Toward an idiothetic psychology of personality . American Psychologist, 36, 276—289.
22.
Lamiell, J.T. (1982a). An idiothetic difficulty? A reply to Wittig. American Psychologist, 37, 1059.
23.
Lamiell, J.T. (1982b). The case for an idiothetic psychology of personality: A conceptual and empirical foundation. In B.A. Maher & W.B. Maher (Eds.), Progress in experimental personality research (Vol. 11, pp. 1—84). New York: Academic Press.
24.
Lamiell, J.T. (1986a). What is nomothetic about `nomothetic' personality research?Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology , 6, 97—107.
25.
Lamiell, J.T. (1986b). Epistemological tenets of an idiothetic psychology of personality. In A. Angleitner, A. Furnham, & G. van Heck (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe: Current issues and controversies (pp. 3—22). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
26.
Lamiell, J.T. (1986c). Some reflections on the psychology of personality measurement. In L. van Langenhove, J.M. deWaele, & R. Harré (Eds.), Individual persons and their actions: Essays in honour of J.P. deWaele (pp. 115—134). Brussels: Free University of Brussels Press.
27.
Lamiell, J.T. (1987). The psychology of personality: An epistemological inquiry. New York: Columbia University Press.
28.
Lamiell, J.T. (1990a). Explanation in the psychology of personality . In D.N. Robinson & L.P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 153—192). New York: Plenum.
29.
Lamiell, J.T. (1990b). Let's be careful out there: Reply to commentaries . In D.N. Robinson & L.P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 219—231). New York: Plenum.
30.
Lamiell, J.T. (1991). Explanation in a reconceived psychology of personality .Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 11, 11—23.
31.
Lamiell, J.T. (1992). Personality and individual differences. In D.N. Robinson (Ed.), Sourcebook in general psychology (pp. 205—233). New York: McGraw-Hill.
32.
Lamiell, J.T. (1997). Individuals and the differences between them. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 117—141). New York : Academic Press.
33.
Lamiell, J.T. (2000). A periodic table of personality elements? The `Big Five' and trait `psychology' in critical perspective. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 20, 1—24.
34.
Lamiell, J.T. (2003). Beyond individual and group differences: Human individuality, scientific psychology, and William Stern's critical personalism . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35.
Lamiell, J.T. (2006). William Stern und der `Ursprungsmythos' der Differentiellen Psychologie. Journal fürPsychologie, 14, 253—273.
36.
Lamiell, J.T., & Trierweiler, S.J. (1986). Interactive measurement, idiothetic inquiry, and the challenge to conventional `nomotheticism'. Journal of Personality, 54, 460—469.
37.
Lewin, K. (1935). Dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
38.
Martin, J., Sugarman, J., & Thompson, J. (2003). Psychology and the question of agency. Albany: State University of New York Press.
39.
McAdams, D.P., & Pals, J.L. (2006). A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist , 61, 204—217.
40.
McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T., Jr. (1986). Clinical assessment can benefit from recent advances in personality psychology. American Psychologist , 41, 1001—1003.
41.
McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T., Jr. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81-90.
42.
McCrae, R.R., & Costa, P.T., Jr. (1995). Trait explanations in personality psychology. European Journal of Personality, 9, 231—252.
43.
McReynolds, P. (1989). Special review. Personality and Individual Differences, 10, 133.
44.
Miller, R.B. (Ed.). (1992). The restoration of dialogue: Readings in the philosophy of clinical psychology . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
45.
Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley.
46.
Ozer, D.J. (1990). Individual differences and the explanation of behavior. In D.N. Robinson & L.P. Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 201—209). New York: Plenum.
47.
Paunonen, S.V., & Jackson, D.N. (1986a). Nomothetic and idiothetic measurement in personality . Journal of Personality, 54, 447—459.
48.
Paunonen, S.V., & Jackson, D.N. (1986b). Idiothetic inquiry and toil of Sisyphus. Journal of Personality, 54, 470—477.
49.
Porter, T.M. (1986). The rise of statistical thinking: 1820—1900. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
50.
Rorer, L.G., & Widiger, T.A. (1983). Personality structure and assessment. Annual Review of Psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 431—463). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews Inc.
51.
Ross, A.O. (1987). Personality: The scientific study of complex human behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
52.
Rychlak, J.F. (1988). The psychology of rigorous humanism (2nd ed.). New York: New York University Press.
53.
Samelson, F. (1974). History, origin myth, and ideology: Comte's `discovery' of social psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior , 4, 217—231.
54.
Smythe, W.E. (Ed.). (1998). Toward a psychology of persons. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
55.
Stern, W. (1900). über Psychologie der individuellen Differenzen (Ideen zu einer `differentiellen Psychologie'). Leipzig : Barth.
56.
Stern, W. (1911). Die Differentielle Psychologie in ihren methodischenGrundlagen. Leipzig: Barth.
57.
Stern, W. (1917). Die Psychologie und der Personalismus. Leipzig: Barth.
58.
Stern, W. (1921). Richtlinien für die Methodik der psychologieschen Praxis. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für angewandtePsychologie , 29, 1—16.
59.
Stern, W. (1925). Aus dreijährige Arbeit des Hamburger Psychologischen Laboratoriums. Zeitschrift für pädagogischePsychologie, 26, 289—307.
60.
Stern, W. (1927). Selbstdarstellung. In R. Schmidt (Ed.), Philosophie der Gegenwart in Selbstdarstellung (Vol. 6, pp. 128—184). Leipzig : Barth.
61.
Stern, W. (1929). Persönlichkeitsforschung und Testmethode. Jahrbuch der Charaketerologie, 6, 63—72.
62.
Stern, W. (1930). Eindrücke von der amerikanischen Psychologie: Bericht Über eine Kongreßreise. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, experimentelle Pädagogik und jugendkundliche Forschung, 31, 43—51 and 65—72.
63.
Stern, W. (1933). Der personale Faktor in Psychotechnik und praktischer Psychologie. Zeitschrift für angewandtePsychologie, 44, 52—63.
64.
Thorndike, E.L. (1911). Individuality. New York: Houghton-Mifflin.
65.
Toulmin, S., & Leary, D.E. (1985). The cult of empiricism in psychology, and beyond . In S. Koch & D.E. Leary (Eds.), A century of psychology as science (pp. 594—617). New York: McGraw-Hill.
66.
Trierweiler, S.J., & Stricker, G. (1998). The scientific practice of professional psychology . New York: Plenum.
67.
Valsiner, J. (1986). Between groups and individuals: Psychologists' and laypersons' interpretations of correlational findings. In J. Valsiner (Ed.), The individual subject and scientific psychology (pp. 113—151). New York: Plenum.
68.
Valsiner, J. (2005). Toward a new science of the person: The potentials of the critical personology of William Stern [Review of J.T. Lamiell, Beyond individual and group differences]. Theory &Psychology , 15, 401—406.
69.
Venn. (1888). The logic of chance. London/New York: Macmillan.
70.
Wittig, A.F. (1982). An idiothetic difficulty. American Psychologist, 37, 98.
71.
Wundt, W. (1910). Über reine und angewandte Psychologie. Psychologische Studien, 5, 1—47.
72.
Wundt, W. (1913). Die Psychologie im Kampf ums Dasein (2nd ed.). Leipzig: Kröner.
