problems (Zax & Specter, 1974). Rappaport (1977)
characterized community psychology in terms of a
perspective rather than to attempt a formal defini-
tion. The major aspects of this perspective are
cultural relativity, diversity, and ecology (the fit
between persons and the environment) (Orford,
2008; Seidman, 2011; Trickett, 2009).
This perspective has several implications. First,
community psychologists do not focus exclusively
on inadequate environments or persons. Rather,
they direct their attention to the fit between envi-
ronments and persons—a fit that may or may not
promote adaptation. Second, community psycholo-
gists emphasize the creation of alternatives through
identifying and developing the resources and
strengths of people and communities. Thus, the
focus is on action directed toward the competencies
of persons and environments rather than their deficits.
Third, the community psychologist believes that
differences among people and communities are desir-
able. Societal resources, therefore, should not be
allocated according to one standard of competence.
The community psychologist does not become iden-
tified with a single social norm or value but instead
looks to the promotion of diversity.
In Rappaport’s (1977) view, three sets of con-
cerns define the community psychology perspec-
tive: human resource development, political
activity, and science. In many ways, these elements
are antagonistic. Political activists are often impa-
tient and deride more traditional clinicians as bring-
ing society too little too late. Clinicians in turn
often criticize activists as unprofessional and overly
concerned with hawking their own visions of the
world. Both groups often regard scientists as too far
removed from real problems to know what is going
on in the world (the“ivory tower”syndrome). The
scientists in turn are appalled by activists and clin-
icians alike; both are seen as shockingly willing to
act on the basis of invalidated hunches and lack of
data or, worst of all, without a viable theory to
guide them. However, true societal changes vis-
à-vis mental health will require the cooperation of
each of these“camps.”For example, scientists must
provide data to support and direct the efforts of
clinicians and political activists, and political activists
must assist with funding for scientists so that they
can conduct the research that is needed. After all,
each camp has the common goal of improved well-
being and mental health for individuals, communi-
ties, and the larger society.
Whatever else community psychology may be,
it is not a field that emphasizes an individual disease
or individual treatment model (Iscoe, 1982; Orford,
2008; Seidman, 2011; Trickett, 2009). The focus is
preventive rather than curative. Further, individuals
and community organizations are encouraged to
take control of and master their own problems
(via empowerment) so that traditional professional
intervention will not be necessary (Orford, 1992).Chronology and Catalyzing Events
In 1955, the U.S. Congress passed legislation creat-
ing the Joint Commission on Mental Health and
Illness. Its report encouraged the development of
a community mental health concept and urged a
reduction in the population of mental hospitals.
Based on the premise that psychological distress
and the development of mental disorders were
influenced by adverse environmental conditions,
President Kennedy called for a “bold new
approach” to prevent mental disorder. The so-
called Kennedy Bill of 1963 funded the construc-
tion of mental health centers. Their aims were to
promote the early detection of mental health prob-
lems, treat acute disorders, and establish compre-
hensive delivery systems of services that would
prevent the“warehousing”of chronic patients in
mental hospitals (Bloom, 1973). The American
Psychological Association endorsed the desirability
of community residents’participating in all these
decisions (Smith & Hobbs, 1966) and helped
focus attention on the concept of community
approaches and participation.
A conference held in 1965 is regarded by many
as the“official” birth of community psychology
(Zax & Specter, 1974). At Swampscott, Massachu-
setts, a group of psychologists set out to review the
status of the field and to plot a future course of
development for the place of psychology in the
community mental health movement.COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY 461