The Trend from Americanization to Internationalization 515address at the 1978 International Association of Applied
Psychology (IAAP) Munich congress, Fleishman (1979) re-
flected on the possibilities to apply psychological research
and knowledge to pressing global social problems. Triandis
(1994) stated a similar theme in his inaugural address at the
1994 IAAP Congress in Madrid when he stressed the need
for cooperative research on intercultural conflict resolution
and reproductive behavior. Issues of drug and alcohol abuse,
violence, women’s rights, and responsible parenthood gained
the attention of psychologists (e.g., David, 1994). There was
a realization that policy makers sought more than scientific
conclusions. They wanted recommendations for making de-
cisions. Applied research began to move beyond determining
why something is so to how it could be changed and at what
cost.
Recent years have seen a continual increase in research
related to socially significant problems of international inter-
est (e.g., Fleishman, 1999). Through diverse programs of the
United Nations and its specialized agencies, psychologists
became involved in such humanitarian endeavors as design-
ing psychological first-aid programs for children trauma-
tized by civil strife and war, facilitating mental health and
health policy deliberations, and treating survivors of war
trauma and torture (e.g., Hanscom, 2001; Kapor-Stanulovic,
1999).
One specific example of psychologists’ involvement in
social change is the case of South Africa beginning in the
1980s when the world became increasingly aware of the
injustices of the apartheid system. The presence of apartheid
resonated strongly for U.S. psychologists, especially among
African Americans, other psychologists of color, and Jewish
immigrants who had come to the United States from pre- and
post-World War II Europe.
The APA began to take action in 1981 when its finance
committee divested its holdings in five corporations with
direct assets in South Africa and agreed to bar future South
African investments until further notice. In 1986, the APA
issued a resolution urging “American psychologists to refuse
to collaborate in projects sponsored by the South African
government until human rights reforms are instituted.”
Strictly interpreted, this resolution virtually prohibited inter-
action with South African psychologists, regardless of race,
since all the country’s universities and clinics were govern-
ment sponsored.
Over the years, the APA resisted a number of pleas to
amend the resolution and generally declined invitations, even
from black-sponsored organizations, to go to meetings in
South Africa. The sole exception were several planning
meetings—convened by the culturally diverse and represen-
tative Psychology and Apartheid Committee—which led to
the 1994 inauguration of the Psychological Society of South
Africa, replacing the former Psychological Association of
South Africa. While the APA encouraged and supported a
variety of programs to bring Black South Africans to U.S.
institutions and meetings, the Association’s Council of Rep-
resentatives did not rescind either its policy or the practice of
divestiture until after the 1994 election of Nelson Mandela to
the presidency of South Africa.THE TREND FROM AMERICANIZATION
TO INTERNATIONALIZATIONIn discussions with colleagues in diverse parts of the world,
the complaint was often voiced that, particularly since the
end of World War II, psychology has been “Americanized,” a
term described by Graumann (1997) as a “critical polemic
catch-word to designate the expansion of the American way
of life” into other cultures (p. 265). Van Strien (1997) de-
scribed Americanization as a form of “scientific coloniza-
tion,” meaning intellectual domination of an existing culture
by a foreign, more powerful one. Van Strien did not mean to
imply an enforced suppression of an older culture but a more
voluntary submission to a dominant culture, a kind of “colo-
nial pact,” a term ascribed to Moscovici.
Graumann (1997) reviews what he believes “American”
means for U.S. psychologists. He cites Cattell’s recollection
that when he presented Wundt with his proposal to study “the
objective measurement of the time of reactions with special
reference to individual differences,” Wundt commented
that it was “ganz Amerikanisch” (“typically American”).
In his view, only psychologists could be the subjects in
psychological experiments. Graumann cites other examples,
noting Koch’s (1985) account of what he calls “psychology’s
American naturalization,” meaning “despite its European
origins, psychology acquired the attributes of an almost
uniquely American enterprise.” Graumann (1997) notes
that the “early generations of Wundt-trained American psy-
chologists” after their return to the United States turned to
“applied and commercial interests.” Cattell, Judd, Hall,
Witmer, and many others were all soon engaged in commer-
cializing psychology in one form or another. Graumann
(1997) sums up that “when Americans speak of American
psychology, they usually refer to features characteristic of
American culture that is seen in contrast to its European
origins” (p. 267).
There is ample evidence that following the emigration
of many leading psychologists from Hitler’s Germany and
Austria in the 1930s, the center of gravity in psychology
shifted from Europe to the United States. Triandis (1980) has