Psychological Bulletin

Willey, M. M.; Herskovits, M. J.

doi: 10.1037/h0070983pmid: N/A

A review of literature (148 titles). (1) Anthropologists have called into serious question those interpretations of psychological testing that make much of racial differences; and in general they have tended to emphasize the cultural factors as against the biological in the analysis of human behavior. (2) Wissler has gone farthest in analyzing the morphology of culture into its component "traits;" and many investigators have made analyses of certain cultures in the Americas and elsewhere along this line; but along with this "pattern" description there has been a "functional" emphasis upon the interrelation between culture traits and between traits and individuals. (3) In studies of the dynamics of culture points of sharp disagreement have emerged. "To be sure, culture grows only through man, but in culture itself, and not in man, is the causative factor that conditions the rate of growth:" such a statement has both its defenders and its opponents. A wider divergence is found between most American anthropologists, on the one hand, who treat the cultures of different sections "inductively," and are content to note their particular diffusions from many focal points, as affected by distances, ecological conditions, etc., and the German and English anthropologists, on the other, who adhere to the doctrine of diffusion of all cultures from a single origin, as the Egyptian. (4) The evolutionist mode of interpreting cultural change has given place to theories emphasizing the geographical, the individual psychological, and the racial contributions.

Allport, G. W.

doi: 10.1037/h0073629pmid: N/A

A review of literature (46 titles) shows confusions to be found in many attempts to list or describe traits of personality. It is suggested by the reviewer that a trait be defined: (1) as an independent statistical variable; (2) as a dynamic trend of behavior that results from the integration of numerous specific habits (a hierarchy); and (3) as a general habitual mode of adjustment that has a directive influence upon specific responses. Theoretical and experimental studies in monographs, textbooks, etc., are cited as contributing to each of the three phases of the definition offered. Personality as a whole––it is recommended on the basis of the literature––is to be conceived neither as inherently synthesized, nor as merely a list of dissociated traits, but as including major and minor syntheses and disconnected acts, all being a matter of degree.

Allen, C. N.

doi: 10.1037/h0074974pmid: N/A

The recent literature (74 titles listed) includes some studies of sex differences as to skull size and shape, size of appendix, rate of metabolism, and emotional variations of blood pressure. Researches continue on the somatic effects of hormones from cells in the reproductive apparatus in female and male; and further study of the subject tends to substantiate Hollingworth's earlier conclusion that menstruation is less a handicap to woman than is her warped idea of its effect. As for mental differences between the sexes, a greater memory ability of women is found by several investigators, and a difference in conversation interests has been shown; but for most other traits, as well as for variability within each sex, the results are conflicting. Certainly, the differential social training of the two sexes remains a heavy factor.

Fernberger, Samuel W.

doi: 10.1037/h0065761pmid: N/A

Reviews the book Psychology and ethnology by W. H. R. Rivers (Edited with Preface and Introduction by G. Elliot Smith; 1926). This is a collection of papers by the late Dr. Rivers covering a wide range of topics, only a few of which have any direct psychological import. Although many of them have appeared previously in various publications, it is convenient to have them brought together in one collection. It is presumably the last collection of addresses and papers by Dr. Rivers, and Dr. Smith takes occasion to summarize the contributions which this renowned British anthropologist has made. It will be fitting, therefore, to assess here Rivers' major contributions to anthropology. The character of Rivers' work falls into a few chronological periods, which follow in the main a logical order. He started his career as a medical man and was soon interested in the psychological work of his contemporaries, first in abnormal psychology, then in the experimental "brass instrument" psychology which was popular thirty years ago, and more, perhaps, than any other one man was responsible for giving psychology a foothold in British universities. His tests of Egyptians, Sholagas, Todas, and the peoples of the Torres Straits convinced him that there was no fundamental difference in the sense discriminations of men of the lowly cultures and those of civilization, save perhaps in discrimination of blue and shades of blue. His work in this field is of a high order of merit and has stood the test of subsequent decades. He then turned attention to objective methods of analyzing primitive culture and developed his deservedly famous genealogical method. His next step was to attempt to analyze cultures by an objective method which would give an insight into their historical background. The reviewer is among those who regard the last phases of Rivers' work as the weakest, as an illustration of method uncritically developed and uncritically applied. In his tests of the psychological abilities of savages, Rivers had a check upon his observations and his conclusions, for the results were compared with similar experiments upon Caucasoids. One of the most important results of Rivers' early psychological work was his conclusion that psychology cannot solve the problems of culture. It is mainly for the appreciation of the importance of culture facts for culture analysis, for the work in experimental psychology, and for the genealogical method that Dr. Rivers will be gratefully remembered by anthropologists.

Fernberger, Samuel W.

doi: 10.1037/h0068225pmid: N/A

Reviews the book A bibliography of character and personality by A. A. Roback (1927). Roback's bibliography is the second extensive survey of literature in the field of personality to appear within the past year. It offers interesting points of comparison with Dr. Manson's work (A Bibliography of the Analysis and Measurement of Human Personality up to 1926, Washington: Nat. Res. Council, Reprint No. 72, 1926). The first arresting point of comparison is the relatively slight overlapping. Less than 15 per cent of the total number of citations are duplicated in the two bibliographies. The lists are complementary, and the investigator will find it advantageous to have both at hand for reference. Another point of comparison lies in the use of foreign articles. Close to 60 per cent of Dr. Roback's references are from publications in a foreign language, approximately 50 per cent of the total being in German. Occasionally Dr. Roback annotates his references, especially where they bear some special relation to the argument of his book. Each reference is accompanied by a symbol which indicates the nature of its approach to the problem of personality. There are thirty-two such approaches distinguished, including the psychological, psychoanalytic, ethical, sociological, etc. One appendix is devoted to a reclassification of titles according to point of view. Roback's work is particularly commendable since it makes accessible a knowledge of standard works, no matter of what antiquity or nationality. It thus broadens the horizon of the student beyond mere superficial interest in testing.

Fernberger, Samuel W.

doi: 10.1037/h0064807pmid: N/A

Reviews the book An introduction to anthropology by Wilson D. Wallis (1926). The writer of a modern text in anthropology is forced to choose between the two horns of what really is an insuperable dilemma. Either he must attempt to sketch all phases of the subject, including the bewildering and ever-accumulating array of material in the field of culture, or he must confine attention to a few phases of his field, developing these in some detail, but omitting entirely any consideration of many other equally important aspects of the subject. There is no half way about it--it is either, or. And no matter what may be the choice, the author is certain to be criticized. Professor Wallis has decided upon the broad picture, and in his recent book attempts to present, even if only in merest fragments, a complete survey of anthropological material. The result is that certain subjects are admittedly most briefly discussed. Compact as it is, it can be said that a reading of the book will probably, with the aid of the teacher, give the student a fairly comprehensive view of the subject, and provide him with the minimum background upon which he can build in more detail later. Professor Wallis has written a textbook, and it must be judged as such. The book is divided into five parts: physical anthropology; prehistoric man; economic and industrial activity; science, magic, and religion; and social morphology and culture. The author's own theories do not intrude upon the text. For the teacher, the volume should prove a useful book around which to build an introductory course in anthropology.