Confluence of Dynamic Forces 383psychology, or applied psychology. In addition to functional-
ism and the mental-testing movement, great emphasis was
placed on empirical methods because psychologists felt com-
pelled to legitimize their science and to address society’s
skepticism of the profession. Industrial psychology evolved
from these developments in psychology (see Goodwin, 1999,
or Hergenhahn, 1997, for a lengthier discussion of the devel-
opment of American psychology).
Connections are apparent between I-O psychology and psy-
chology perspectives such as behaviorism, neobehaviorism,
gestalt, humanistic, and cognitive psychology. Behaviorism
was a catalyst for conducting objective studies of behavior,
developing practical applications, and including environmen-
tal or situational variables in theories of work behavior. For
example, I-O theorists identified behaviors and situational
conditions for effective leadership and developed behavioral
measures for evaluating performance. One manifestation of
Skinner’s neobehaviorism was organizational behavior modi-
fication (Katzell & Austin, 1992). Similarities exist between
the systems view of organizations and gestalt theory. The
humanistic perspective inspired theorists and researchers to
consider self-actualization and noneconomic motivators in
the workplace. Lord and Maher (1991) described several
developments in I-O psychology derived from the cognitive
revolution. For example, cognitive theory has helped I-O psy-
chologists understand cognitive processes in evaluating per-
formance and designing jobs. Further exploration of the links
between psychology and I-O psychology is needed.
Intradisciplinary Forces
In addition to external forces, individuals within I-O psychol-
ogy contributed to the sustained growth of research and prac-
tice. According to SIOP past president (1986–1987) Sheldon
Zedeck, “I-O psychologists have an intrinsic interest in solv-
ing problems” (Sheldon Zedeck, personal communication,
July 6, 2000). Early in the history of I-O psychology, Hugo
Münsterberg, James McKeen Cattell, Walter Dill Scott,
Walter VanDyke Bingham, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, Kurt
Lewin, and others had the vision and initiative for developing
ways their young, evolving discipline could be applied to
business and societal needs (Koppes, 1997; Landy, 1997)
and for identifying relevant topics for scientific research
(Katzell & Austin, 1992). Münsterberg, for example, provided
the foundation for every major development in industrial psy-
chology in his booksPsychology and Industrial Efficiency
(1913) andBusiness Psychology(1917) (Moskowitz, 1977).
Too many individuals influenced I-O psychology to men-
tion all the names here. Reviewing reference lists or the
indexes of I-O textbooks and specialized I-O books reveals
the vast number of contributors. Presidents of organized I-O
psychology (APA Division 14 and SIOP) are elected be-
cause of their significant contributions, which are described in
their autobiographies available on the SIOP Web site (www.
siop.org). SIOP members are given the distinction of fellow
because of their outstanding contributions to the discipline.
SIOP awards are named after influential individuals (Koppes,
1999), and award recipients are recognized for their contribu-
tions. Other contributors are recognized in biographies and
obituaries, which are published inTIP. In addition to individ-
ual accomplishments, I-O psychologists created ways to work
together. For example, many I-O psychologists formed pro-
fessional groups, such as the Dearborn Conference Group
(Meyer, 1997) and the No-Name Group (Benjamin, 1997), to
address concerns, discuss issues, and share research. I-O psy-
chologists have also established consulting firms, which pro-
vide for collaborations between individuals and subsequent
developments in research and practice (e.g., Center for Cre-
ative Leadership, Development Dimensions International,
Jeanneret and Associates, Inc., Personnel Research Associ-
ates, Inc., Personnel Decisions Research Institute).
An indicator of developments in the field is the number of
periodicals, books, and other sources that contain I-O-related
research and applications. In addition to the resources men-
tioned in this chapter, over 25 different journals were formed,
handbooks on related topics were created (e.g., Lorsch, 1987),
two annual series were generated (e.g.,Research in Organiza-
tional BehaviorandResearch in Personnel and Human Re-
source Management),and two series were established by
SIOP to publish cutting-edge research and applications:
Organizational Frontiers of Industrial and Organizational
PsychologyandThe Professional Practice Series.
Numerous advances have been observed within the disci-
pline. Katzell and Austin (1992) and Katzell (1994) identified
metatrends such as the predominant use of sophisticated
statistical analyses (e.g., structural equation modeling, meta-
analysis) and more attention to outcomes not directly linked
to the bottom line (e.g., stress and career development).
Dunnette (1998) recognized accomplishments in his recent
review of trends and emerging issues in I-O psychology:
Most significant has been an increasingly fruitful blending of as-
pects of the science and practice of this field. Special attention
has been directed towards systematic study of issues related to
fair employment practices, and to broader recognition of the im-
portance of meta-analysis for advancing knowledge as opposed
to such simplistic approaches as statistical significance testing.
Increased attention has been focused on the importance of ge-
netic influences in areas of work behaviour....Several important