I have recently assumed the position of Chair of Division 5's Global Affairs Committee and have been inviting our division members to join this effort, contribute their own ideas, and network with each other. Here, I offer some of my own ideas about and interests in our division's global affairs that constellate around what I am calling "Psychologists above Borders.
Division 5 is a pool of expertise in assessment, measurement, evaluation, psychometrics, statistics, and qualitative inquiry in such areas as educational psychology, industrial-organizational psychology, healthcare psychology, and so many others. While some of the above areas such as measurement and statistics transcend geography and culture in some ways, psychological methods are influenced by culture and socio-political conditions that affect the choice of research problem, goals of research, data gathering and interpretation of results. Our knowledge base and the character of the discipline is built in particular settings. Related to the contextuality of research is the concept of methods vs. methodology expounded by Pek and Bauer (2023), wherein methods concerns tool development or content whereas methodology focuses on motivation and reasoned justification for using particular methods. Intercultural study of methodology behind our methods is the next logical step in our quest to understand and take responsibility for our science in its global context. The indigenous psychologies, emerging all over the world, offer a wealth of material and contribute to our effort to understand and expand the potential of psychological science. For example, from my own country, among the numerous pioneering contributions of Virgilio G. Enriquez, the Father of Filipino Psychology and my undergraduate and graduate teacher, are his works on indigenous research methods, in consideration of the Filipino psyche. Enriquez’s themes include research as consciousness raising vs. data gathering, research as facilitation, and research as encounter, among others (Enriquez, 1997). In a related vein, I (Velazco, 1985) developed an instrument assessing the adaptive competencies of rural Filipino children as an alternative to traditional intelligence measurement. As the researcher, I lived with and became part of the community and engaged the adults in the target population in the instrument development process, from content validation to field administration.
Frederick Wertz (2017) made a very comprehensive presentation of the extensive work that has already been done in the field of indigenous psychologies, touching on concepts proposed by different authors, such as (citing only a few that are related to this paper): “questions decisive for genuine humanity (meaning, value, purpose)”, “universal knowledge absolutely free from prejudice, of the world and human individuals, collectives, and cultural artifacts” (Edmund Husserl, cited in Wertz, 2017); “possibility of cross-indigenous universal psychology” (Allwood & Berry, 2006, cited in Wertz, 2017); and concluding among others, that “methods developed in one culture may have potential in other cultures for improving knowledge; critical, multicultural sharing may enhance science; and (alluding to) potential for unification of methodological pluralism” (Wertz, 2017).
From the indigenous psychologies, a composite, unifying configuration of the intercultural elements found in research might be very enlightening as it leads to a more global understanding of our science and profession. After all, all psychologies are indigenous in the sense that each is embedded in a specific culture and scholarly community, inevitably carrying forth its values, ways of knowing, and understanding of psychological life.
While being adept at integrating the discipline with the cultural and socio-political climate one works in is necessary in order to function competently in a particular setting, perhaps the core or basics of the human subject and behavior beyond the borders of geography and culture are not fully tapped. While diversity needs to be recognized and accepted, we are, after all, human beings first before being American, African, European, or Asian. Psychology can offer us an understanding of both our differences as well as our common humanity.
"Psychologists without Borders" (2022) provides culturally competent mental health support in different languages. "Psychology Beyond Borders" (2005) focuses on psychosocial preparedness, prevention, and response to disasters, armed conflict and terrorism. How about Psychologists Above Borders, with 'borders' referring to culture-specific perspectives. In order to rise above the borders, one has to know what the borders are, what lies within the borders, and then come up with a robust framework of commonalities vis a vis the differences across cultures and settings. The key to a genuine achievement of an understanding of core humanity and the core of psychological science is the inclusion and respect for cultural differences in life and the science/profession of psychology as it is manifest across the subfields of psychology, for instance in educational psychology, industrial psychology, program evaluation, etc... A psychologist above borders, in this conception, is one who has been exposed to, lived with, and struggled with the diverse ways of human life and scientific practices and then synthesized what is core at the level of being human and human self-knowledge.
Is rising above the borders necessary, given that after all we (will) inevitably function within a specific context and culture? Yes, because with the trend toward globalization/internationalization, one's world of work is expanding. We live in one world in which we are interrelated and interdependent. We share a common destiny on earth. Yes, because more important than the content is the exemplified process, wherein we, in an established discipline like psychology, still seek a broader understanding of humanity as a whole, toward greater appreciation and acceptance of each other and toward expansion and globalization of our knowledge base to include a scope beyond our traditional confines. The process of going not only within but above the borders can also enhance the sub-disciplines of educational psychology, specific practices such as research interviewing, etc., especially with the current trend of globalization. For example, there could be a forum on "International Research Interviewing", "International Program Evaluation", etc. in Division 5 and in our larger organization of APA, Psychologists Above Borders can be invited as presenters in remote programs and on-site at our conferences and as authors in our journals, Psychological Methods, Psychological Assessment, and Qualitative Psychology. If what one teaches is something that one has seen and experienced, then the local subject matter and teaching-learning process can become very valuable globally. Also, the group of Psychologists Above Borders could be another group of specialist psychologists, whose contributions could feed the work of other specializations within psychology, as well as in other disciplines.
My big dream is for interested psychologists in Division 5 to engage in reciprocal, international hosting in each other’s country, if appropriate, in order to experience the practice of their discipline in other settings.
"Psychology Above Borders" may not be just a scholarly endeavor but a contribution to making the world a better place through greater understanding of different peoples and by modeling more encompassing methods of understanding. Can EMS be anymore above borders? They are already mostly universal and standard. But the answer is yes. Because they affect lives, egos, and futures--numbers and results may be viewed, accepted, and acted on differently across cultures and settings. The quantitative psychologist who is exposed to and understands these nuances exemplifies being above borders.
Psychologists above borders are experientially exposed to the counterpart of their background, training, or calling in other cultures. More than the content, it is the behavior around the content, how much of it is similar to or different from the ones they know. Is there something we can learn from each other about how to practice psychology in another way, not so much the content, for that is bound to be different, but the process of determining the appropriate method of deriving the sought after content, and the actions that come after? If we look, beyond the results, at different peoples' attitudes, values, motivations, and actions surrounding measurement, statistics, studies in parapsychology, community psychology, etc., therein lies the need for understanding, which can be the basis of new models or frameworks that reflect a global perspective. There is humanity to which the numbers or data refer. It is seeking to understand the humanity manifest in the numbers, the humanity of both the counted and counter, that makes for a global psychologist, a psychologist above borders seeking to traverse the borders and rebuilding them into a unifying, even all-encompassing framework of understanding. Psychology as a discipline would thereby enhance itself as global statistics, global measurement, global assessment, global qualitative inquiry, global evaluation. Global here means not just statistics about people, but rather, people’s statistics, not just measurement of people, but rather, measurement by people. It’s different peoples' take on data, from numbers to verbal expressions--psychologists' actions that determine our discipline’s usefulness in solving our society’s and world's problems.
Perhaps one way to put it is that, being a member of the APA and Division 5, you are a psychologist above borders when you say you want to be, when you open yourself experientially to the counterparts of your discipline, background, training, and calling in other cultures in addition to your own, and when you strive to formulate and share a unifying framework of your experiences in some kind of forum or publication or message board that I am proposing to call "Psychologists Above Borders".
The psychologist above borders seeks to understand, not only their own, using their own methodology, but humanity as a whole, as the Creator understands us all.
References
Enriquez, V.G. (1997). Filipino psychology: Concepts and methods. In H.S.R. Kao & D. Sinha (Eds.) Asian perspectives on psychology (pp. 40-53). Sage Publications, Inc.
Pek J., & Bauer, D. (2023). Refocusing on methodology versus method. The Score.
Psychologists without borders. (2022) https://www.linkedin.com/company/psychologistswithoutborders
Psychology beyond borders. (2005) https://www.hhri.org/organisation/psychology-beyond-borders
Velazco, G.A. (1985). Development of an instrument for the assessment of adaptive competencies of rural Filipino children as an alternative to traditional intelligence measurement (pp.65-99). Philippine Journal of Educational Measurement.
Wertz, F. (2017). Contributions of indigenous psychologies to methodological pluralism in American psychological science. APA Annual Convention, Washington, DC.