psychology_Sons_(2003)

CHAPTER 18

Industrial-Organizational Psychology

LAURA L. KOPPES

367

THE RISE OF INDUSTRIAL-ORGANIZATIONAL
PSYCHOLOGY 367
Labels and Definitions 367
Scope of Content 368
Education 370
Employment 371
Organized Industrial-Organizational Psychology 372
Summary 372
CONFLUENCE OF DYNAMIC FORCES 373
Socioeconomic Forces 374
Business Forces 377

Legal Forces 379

Military Forces 380

Technological Forces 381

Psychological Forces 382

Intradisciplinary Forces 383

SUMMARY 384

CONCLUSION: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? 384

REFERENCES 385

The scope and present status of the science [Industrial Psychol-

ogy], the rapidity of its development, can only be fully under-

stood by considering economic, social, and psychological

factors which have contributed to this development. (Viteles,

1932, p. 5)

While studying great discoveries and individuals in the his-
tory of industrial-organizational (I-O) psychology in the past
several years, I found myself frequently asking, “Whywere
psychologists studying behavior in work settings and apply-
ing psychology to improve the workplace?” To answer this
question, I realized that the evolution of I-O psychology must
be examined within the overall social, cultural, and political
contexts of the times, an approach referred to as a new his-
tory of psychology (Furumoto, 1988). Pate and Wertheimer
(1993), for example, stated, “The history of a discipline such
as psychology involves describing major discoveries, illumi-
nating questions of priority, and identifying ‘great individu-
als’ in the context of a national or international Zeitgeist”
(p. xv). This chapter is a nascent effort to describe the zeit-
geist or social-historical context of I-O psychology by identi-
fying various dynamic forces that shaped the rise of the
discipline during the past 100 years in the United States.
The history presented in this chapter is not intended to be
a comprehensive description of I-O psychology content or a
duplication of historical accounts previously written (e.g.,
Austin & Villanova, 1992; Baritz, 1960; Colarelli, 1998;

Farr & Tesluk, 1997; Ferguson, 1962–1965; Hilgard, 1987;

Katzell & Austin, 1992; Koppes, 1997; Landy, 1992, 1997;

Meltzer & Stagner, 1980; Napoli, 1981; Thayer, 1997; Van De

Water, 1997; Zickar, 2001). Katzell and Austin (1992) pro-

vided the most comprehensive review of I-O psychology’s his-

tory, and I rely heavily on their work to present the rise of I-O

psychology and to examine why I-O psychologists embraced

various issues and questions. This chapter consists of two main

sections. The first encapsulates I-O psychology’s growth; the

second describes the dynamic forces that shaped I-O psychol-

ogy and reveals that the discipline’s evolution was the result of

confluences of several external and internal forces.

THE RISE OF INDUSTRIAL-ORGANIZATIONAL

PSYCHOLOGY

The growth of I-O psychology can be ascertained from ex-

amining changes in labels and definitions, scope of content,

education, employment, and organized I-O psychology.

Labels and Definitions

During the early years, I-O psychology was labeled economic

psychology (Münsterberg, 1914) or business psychology

(Kingsbury, 1923; Münsterberg, 1917). Industrial psychol-

ogywas used infrequently before World War I but became