This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Jost, J. T. Articles by Kruglanski, A. W. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Jost, J. T. Articles by Kruglanski, A. W. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Estrangement of Social Constructionism and Experimental Social Psychology: History of the Rift and Prospects for Reconciliation

Stanford University

Arie W. Kruglanski

University of Maryland, College Park

Social constructionism and experimental social psychology represent two complementary paradigms for understanding human social behavior, but over the last quarter century they have remained oddly and unnecessarily estranged from one another In this article, we trace the history of social constructionist thought and find that the intellectual lineage and guiding assumptions of these two subcultures of social psychology are essentially the same. Next, we clarify the philosophical and ideological bases of their divide to determine how wide the rift really is. Although the differences may appear to be unbridgeable, we argue that a rapprochement is both possible and desirable. At the level of metatheory, Donald Campbell and William J. McGuire have demonstrated that constructionist and empirical insights can be usefully integrated in social psychology. At the level of empirical research, studies of the situated self-concept, social identity, collective representation, attitudes as temporary constructions, communication and shared reality, and cultural psychology have progressed through the incorporation of constructionist themes. Similar opportunities await researchers who explore the contextual bases of history, ideology, and other shared systems of meaning and their implications for social psychology. Finally, we identify some substantive and stylistic complementarities of social constructionism and experimental social psychology and analyze their joint potential for contributing to a well-balanced discipline of social psychology that is worthy of both parts of its name.

Personality and Social Psychology Review, Vol. 6, No. 3, 168-187 (2002)
DOI: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0603_1


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. M. Sutton and K. M. Douglas Celebrating Two Decades of Linguistic Bias Research: An Introduction Journal of Language and Social Psychology, June 1, 2008; 27(2): 105 - 109. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. J. Jost and J. T. Jost Why Marx Left Philosophy for Social Science Theory Psychology, April 1, 2007; 17(2): 297 - 322. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Jussim and K. D. Harber Teacher Expectations and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: Knowns and Unknowns, Resolved and Unresolved Controversies Personality and Social Psychology Review, May 1, 2005; 9(2): 131 - 155. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. G. Holmes The Benefits of Abstract Functional Analysis in Theory Construction: The Case of Interdependence Theory Personality and Social Psychology Review, May 1, 2004; 8(2): 146 - 155. [Abstract] [PDF]