Date:         Sun, 09 Jun 96 15:49:32 EDT
From: Alan Davidson <DAVIDSON@UConnVM.UConn.Edu>
Subject:      Social Psychology's demise
To: socgrad@CSF.COLORADO.EDU
Message-Id:   <960609.155544.EDT.DAVIDSON@UConnVM.UConn.Edu>
I don't think the demise of Social Psychology has very much to do with
whether or not it has been able to incorporate biological factors into
its research, or the advent of, and even widely encouraged use of canned
data sets in Sociology.  In fact, if one looks at some of the more classic
"what is wrong" articles from within Social Psychology, such as Sheldon
Stryker's stuff the blame is placed on Social Psych. not being "scientific"
enough.  With respect to the role of biological factors in behavior, one
can make the argument that one reason why Sociology more generally declined
in popularity beginning in the late 1970's corresponded to a rise in
biological theories in the broader society -- sociobiology, cognitive
science, and the like.  What is ironic is it was a similar debunking of
completely behavioristic and psychoanalytic theories of behavior which
led to sociology's relative popularity in the 1960's and early 1970's.