Autonomy, theory, and "applied" versus "basic"
work psychology and its search for identity in Finland, ca. 1945–2000
pp. 187-207
in: Sven Hroar Klempe, Roger Smith (eds), Centrality of history for theory construction in psychology, Berlin, Springer, 2016Abstract
This article examines Finnish work psychologists' search for a theoretical foundation and disciplinary autonomy as a "basic" science during the latter half of the twentieth century. Work psychology and its near equivalents, especially industrial and organizational psychology, have traditionally been described as "applied psychologies" that employ theories and methods developed in "general" or "basic" psychology. At the same time, work psychologists have not necessarily been content with identifying themselves as applied researchers who depend on the intellectual achievements of "basic" or laboratory-based psychology. This article argues that a characteristic feature of the university-based work psychology in Finland was its search for scientific and disciplinary independence and autonomy, which especially in the 1970s found outlet in the somewhat frustrated discussions about the importance of and difficulty in developing a theoretical foundation for work psychology. By contrast, psychologists who readily identified themselves as applied psychologists—especially occupational health psychologists—expressed no such qualms or worries about the lack of independent theory in work psychology: they were experts whose skills and services were considered important by the public sector (state, municipalities) as well as by the private sector. Work psychology was applied psychology, but for Finnish academic work psychologists it was, or should have been, more than that, namely, an independent discipline with a firm identity of a science.