Beyond Individual and Group Differences: Human Individuality, Scientific Psychology, and William Stern's Critical Personalism

Books

James T. Lamiell

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • Copyright

    View Copyright Page

    Preface

    In May of 1984, I participated in a symposium that was part of the program of the Second European Conference on Personality, held at the University of Bielefeld, in what was then West Germany. My invitation to the conference was extended by the symposium organizer, the late Professor Jean-Pierre DeWaele of the Free University of Brussels, and was prompted by an article I had published in the American Psychologist in March of 1981 under the title “Toward an Idiothetic Psychology of Personality.” The paper I presented at the Bielefeld conference was essentially an elaboration and extension of the ideas I had set forth in the 1981 article.

    After my presentation, during discussions with German colleagues Lothar Laux and Hannelore Weber, I was asked if I was at all familiar with the works of William Stern. “Oh sure,” I quickly replied, “he was the IQ guy.” Showing patience for which I shall be forever grateful, Laux and Weber explained to me that Stern's contributions to psychology actually extended quite a bit beyond the invention of the intelligence quotient and that, given my own developing perspective on the field, it might be well worth my while to familiarize myself more extensively with Stern's ideas.

    Back home in the United States some weeks after the conference, I received a mailing from DeWaele that included photocopies of some pages from a work by Stern that had been published in 1906. In an accompanying note, DeWaele directed my attention to some mathematical expressions that appeared in Stern's work, noting the striking formal similarity between those expressions and equations which I had used to convey some of my own nascent ideas in the domain of personality measurement. I think it was exactly then when I decided that, for me at least, familiarity with Stern's writings was not merely an option but a necessity.

    Unfortunately, I had long since passed up the opportunities presented to me during my student years to learn German, and the obstacle left before me by that youthful decision had not yet been overcome as I was writing The Psychology of Personality: An Epistemological Inquiry, which appeared in 1987 (Columbia University Press). Hence, that work contains no references at all to Stern or to that comprehensive system of thought he articulated over the course of his illustrious career, under the name of critical personalism. However, by the time I arrived in Heidelberg in January of 1990 to begin a semester's sabbatical there, I had advanced with my study of German sufficiently to begin reading Stern's works. The project I launched then has been a continuing one ever since, and I was able to progress significantly with it during a second sabbatical semester, spent at the University of Leipzig in 1998.

    With this book, I hope to awaken a wider appreciation for Stern's perspective on human individuality and for the proper place of personalistic thinking within scientific psychology. I regard this contribution not as the completion of my project, but only as its culmination as I have been able to advance with it thus far.

    In my 1987 book, I argued that as the basis for a scientific psychology of personality, the long-dominant and still hegemonic individual differences research paradigm is logically flawed in ways that are both fundamental and irremediable from within that paradigm. The present work underscores and further elaborates that same thesis. Going well beyond the earlier book, however, I have a great deal more to say here, both about the historical emergence of the paradigm that has dominated the thinking of mainstream personality psychologists for most of the 20th century and about the considerations that in my view should guide a reconceptualization of the basic issues in the 21st century. The largely ignored or forgotten contributions to psychology that William Stern made between 1900 and 1935 figure prominently in both lines of discussion.

    Chapter One offers a biographical sketch of Stern's professional life. The remaining nine chapters are evenly distributed over three parts.

    In Part I, I concentrate on the historical roots of modern correlational studies of individual and group differences in the subdiscipline of “differential” psychology that was formally proposed by Stern in 1900. Chapter Two treats of the emergence of Stern's proposal and its early development against the background of the turn-of-the-century general/experimental psychology typified by the research programs of prominent figures such as Wilhelm Wundt and one of Stern's own mentors, Hermann Ebbinghaus.

    Chapter Three focuses on developments within differential psychology that considerably narrowed its scope relative to Stern's initial vision. There, the discussion highlights the influential ideas of E.L. Thorndike and Hugo Münsterberg, and considerable attention is devoted to Stern's ever-growing concern over the untoward influence that the ideas defended by those thinkers were having on differential psychology.

    Following Stern's death in 1938, the most prominent spokesperson for views similar (though not identical) to his own was Gordon W. Allport. Accordingly, Chapter Four is concentrated on Allport's efforts to maintain among scientific psychologists an appreciation for many of the concerns that Stern had voiced previously. Because Allport's efforts in this regard were articulated mainly in terms of the distinction between nomothetic and idiographic personality studies, I concentrate in Chapter Four on the major contours of the debate fueled by Allport's writings on the topic.

    Once Allport finally had been persuaded by his many intellectual adversaries to “cry uncle and retire to his corner” (as he himself put it), the way was effectively cleared for the vast majority within the mainstream of personality psychology to prosecute, virtually unopposed, a strictly “nomothetic” discipline tethered securely to the correlational research methods that had been pioneered by Francis Galton and Karl Pearson in their studies of individual differences in intelligence. By this time, the rest of the considerably broader vision of differential psychology that Stern had set forth in 1911, together with critical personalism, had vanished all but entirely from the disciplinary landscape.

    Coeval with and indeed indispensable to these historical developments was the wholesale investment by scientific psychologists in general—including, but not limited to, those investigators proclaiming specific interest in the psychology of personality—in a research paradigm guided by the principles of statistical thinking. Part II of this book is organized around this enormously consequential fact.

    Chapter Five treats of the historical emergence during the 19th century of statistical thinking itself and of the infusion of that style of thinking into scientific psychology. The discussion points to the ascendance among 19th-century scholars of two competing views of the nature of the knowledge generated when aggregates of individuals sampled from populations are examined statistically—a form of inquiry known originally as “political arithmetic”—and explains why one of those two competing views, but not the other, was serviceable to mainstream psychologists as they effectively reinvented their discipline during the first third of the 20th century.

    Chapter Six is a rudimentary methodology. Through the introduction of simple, hypothetical research examples, it offers an exposition of the basic design and data analysis principles defining the procedural canon that continues to guide inquiry at the interface of what Lee J. Cronbach identified in 1957 as scientific psychology's “two disciplines.” Major emphasis is placed here on the statistical methods that structure such inquiry, in an attempt to make clear how contemporary mainstream trait psychologists see those methods as serving their professed objectives of predicting, explaining, and understanding individual behavior.

    In Chapter Seven, the canon described in Chapter Six is subjected to close critical scrutiny. My intent is to establish beyond all further doubt that the study of variables marking individual and group differences fails to advance scientific understanding of the behavior and psychological life of individual persons, and why this is so. Through an attempt at the beginning of Chapter Seven to set the record straight on what the German philosopher Wilhelm Windelband actually said in 1894 when he drew the distinction between nomothetic and idiographic knowledge objectives, I try to make clear why modern “nomothetic” personality psychology could not possibly be a truly nomothetic science of persons in the sense of nomothetic that Windelband originally intended. Pointing back to the “findings” of the hypothetical investigations introduced for illustrative purposes in Chapter Six, I then try to show why statistical knowledge of the sort issuing from studies of individual and group differences fails logically, and hence necessarily, at every turn as the basis for claims concerning the scientific prediction, explanation, and understanding of individual behavior.

    Part III addresses the challenge of rethinking the problem of human individuality within scientific psychology, and in this section of the book, the historic contributions of Stern return to center stage.

    Chapter Eight offers an introduction to critical personalism. In the first half of the chapter, the major concepts of that system of thought are introduced, following the lead provided by a monograph written by Stern himself for just such purposes and published in 1917 under the title Psychology and Personalism. In the second half of Chapter Eight, I have sought to illustrate several features of personalistic thought through a discussion of parts of a work completed in 1909 by William Stern in collaboration with his wife, Clara, titled Recollection, Testimony, and Lying in Early Childhood.

    In Chapter Nine, two models of personalistic inquiry taken from the contemporary literature are introduced. The first of these is provided by experimental research on the psychology of subjective personality judgments that I have carried out in recent years in collaboration with various students. The findings of that research mount a direct empirical challenge to the long-standing belief that it is meaningless to characterize individuals without comparing them to one another. The same research also illustrates how quantitative methods can be implemented in research that is nevertheless fundamentally personalistic in nature. The model offered here is one I call “neo-Wundtian,” and it is just such a model that I believe should guide the needed reconceptualization of the problem of individuality within scientific psychology.

    The second example of personalistic inquiry discussed in Chapter Nine, illustrating nonexperimental work of a decidedly qualitative nature, is provided by Steven R. Sabat's recent investigations into the experience of Alzheimer's Disease (AD). Based on extensive interviews with AD sufferers, this work beautifully illustrates what can be accomplished when research “subjects” are regarded as persons rather than as mere instances of diagnostic categories such as “mildly” or “severely” cognitively impaired.

    Chapter Ten concludes this work with a general discussion of the potential of personalistic thinking both as a foundation for personality theory and as a framework for social thought. Of surpassing importance in the former regard is an appreciation for the fact that meaningful characterizations of individuals not only can be achieved wholly apart from between-person comparisons but indeed must be achieved for there to be any such comparisons. To see this is to grasp the logical possibility of dispensing with between-person comparisons altogether in the scientific study of personality. This is the conceptual passageway leading out of the long-dominant but fatally flawed paradigm and into a framework decidedly more hospitable to the philosophical and theoretical tenets of Stern's critical personalism.

    The distinction between person characterization, on one hand, and between-person differentiation, on the other, is also significant for the consideration of critical personalism as a framework for social thought. Within this framework, individuality is understood not in terms of behavioral “traits” seen to set one individual apart from others, but rather in terms of personal values that distinguish what an individual's character is from what it is not but would otherwise be were the individual's personal values other than they are. In this view, one's individuality cannot somehow be compromised by being like others in certain respects, because one's individuality does not hinge on being different from those others to begin with.

    By embracing a conception of person characterization that sets aside considerations of between-person differences, it is possible to embrace individual-ity without endorsing individual-ism. In this light, critical personalism emerges as a framework nurturant of community in ways that, arguably, the contemporary emphasis on what separates individuals and groups from each other is not. This suggests that personalistic thinking may have something very important to offer as we seek, in this postmodern age, to come to terms with the various social issues raised by considerations of diversity and multiculturalism.

    As the foregoing suggests, this book engages issues and incorporates material cutting across several subspecialties within contemporary psychology. In the main, the concerns of this work are philosophical and theoretical, but in the service of those concerns, the perspective adopted is in some parts historical, in other parts methodological, and in still other parts empirical. I recognize that in presenting for consideration such a work as this I have run the risk of disappointing, frustrating, and perhaps even losing altogether those readers who do not think of their interests as transcending the boundaries of these various perspectives.

    Nevertheless, it has seemed to me that for the task at hand, this sort of multifaceted treatment is what is called for, and I can only hope that readers who come to this book with concerns that do not seem to articulate with all of the aforementioned facets of the material will invest the effort to engage the entire work nonetheless. For if nature herself cannot be partitioned as our universities are (I believe it was C. West Churchman who once said or wrote words to this effect), nor can every conceptual problem in 21st-century scientific psychology be relegated neatly to just one or another of the field's currently recognized subspecialties.

    This much said, the multifaceted character of the book's contents has mandated some concessions by the author as well. For example, although I have written for an audience primarily comprising advanced students and established academic psychologists, the very specialization to which I have just alluded means that even among readers who are highly knowledgeable in the philosophical, theoretical, and historical areas of the field, there will be many whose familiarity with statistical concepts is quite limited. In an effort to accommodate these readers, I have written of technical matters in a way that might in places seem pedestrian to readers who are already relatively sophisticated in this subject. I must therefore beg the indulgence of those readers and invite them to skip over parts of the discussion that seem too elementary.

    With regard to the historical aspects of this work, I recognize that the present treatment cannot be regarded as complete. For reasons indicated above, my focus has been on William Stern's identification of the “problem of individuality” within scientific psychology, on critical personalism as the system of thought in terms of which he proposed to engage the relevant issues, and on certain intellectual developments within psychology before, during, and soon after Stern's time that were of direct relevance to the fate of his ideas vis-à-vis mainstream 20th century thinking about individuality. Unquestionably, there is much more that could be said to augment the history I have traced here, and I hope that my work will heighten interest in furthering this line of historical inquiry beyond the limits of the present account.

    In July of 2002, I participated in a symposium that was part of the program of the Eleventh European Conference on Personality, held at the University of Jena, in eastern Germany. The conference program was replete with papers discussing empirical findings issuing from studies of individual and group differences, carried out in full accordance with the procedural principles and interpretive traditions that have dominated thinking within mainstream personality psychology for nearly 100 years. Ubiquitous throughout the conference facility and its proximate environs were posters trumpeting the 5-day event and featuring a lengthy passage taken from William Stern's 1911 text, Methodological Foundations of Differential Psychology (quoted in the original German even though the official language of the conference was English).

    Through its contents, the Jena conference program enabled participants to reinforce, both in themselves and in one another, long-standing and widely shared convictions concerning the aptness of modern differential psychology as a vehicle for advancing the scientific understanding of human individuality. What was more, the conference participants could do this while still invoking symbolically, through a quoted textbook passage displayed prominently throughout the conference venue (though opaque to a great many of the participants), the intellectual patronage of differential psychology's acknowledged Founding Father.

    As I observed all of this, it struck me that the Jena conference could serve as the raison d'etre, in microcosm, for this book. First of all, the prevailing consensus among the Jena conference participants (as in the field at large) that statistical knowledge of the kind generated through studies of individual and group differences advances the scientific understanding of individuals’ personalities is ill founded, and needs to be challenged anew. Second, had William Stern been present in the flesh at Jena, he would have rejected the suggestion, implicit in the conference posters, that he concurred with the prevailing consensus. Stern never embraced that view. Indeed, could he have attended the Jena conference himself, the Founding Father of differential psychology would have voiced dissatisfaction with virtually the entire conference program and would have urged instead a careful consideration of his other—and to his own thinking vastly more important—intellectual “child,” critical personalism.

    My mission in writing this book has been to explain thoroughly both that and why all of what I have said in the immediately preceding paragraph is so.

    Acknowledgments

    In completing this project, I have received help from many quarters. Through the Georgetown University Graduate School, I have been supported by two summer research grants and a Senior Faculty Research Fellowship. I have also benefited greatly from a sabbatical granted to me during the Spring 1998 semester. A Fulbright Senior Scholar Award enabled me to spend that sabbatical semester in Leipzig, Germany, where I could make extensive use of the superb library facilities there. Most of the historical research that has gone into this book was completed in Leipzig.

    I would like to thank Alison Kuhl for her help in compiling the bibliography, and for her technical assistance with the tables as well as Melisa Breiner-Sanders's.

    I am grateful to Franz Samelson and Kurt Danziger for their critical comments on my initial ideas about this work. My Georgetown colleagues Norman J. Finkel and Steven R. Sabat provided very helpful feedback on some chapters. Beyond this, Norm and Steve have lent friendly support and encouragement over the entire duration of this lengthy project.

    Through the earliest stages of the journey that has led to this book, my former departmental colleague Daniel N. Robinson was a valuable source of support, encouragement, and intellectual inspiration.

    Several colleagues in Germany have assisted me in many ways, large and small, direct and indirect. Werner Deutsch, Siegfried Hoppe-Graff, and Frank Radtke deserve special mention in this regard.

    As the project neared completion, my wife, Leslie, spent many hours scanning figures and helping me organize the electronic files that had to be created for transmission of the material to Sage. Leslie lent her assistance cheerfully, over and above the countless hours of patience and moral support that could come only from a true partner.

    I am enormously grateful to the talented and consummately professional Ms. Carla Freeman for her thorough and sensitive copyediting.

    Had I to thank the Senior Editor at Sage, Jim Brace-Thompson, only for his confidence in and backing of this project, my task would be quite large enough. But when our collaboration began, neither of us could have known that with several chapters of this work still to be written, much of my time and attention would be diverted to the care of my dying mother. Jim Brace-Thompson's message to me was clear and unambiguous: “Take all the time you need, and treasure all of it that you have. The book will wait, and Sage will wait for it.” I cannot find the words to convey the full measure of my gratitude to Jim Brace-Thompson for his patience and understanding through that challenging time.

    Dedication

    To my son Kevin, to my daughter Erika, and to the memory of my mother, Rita Jacobs Lamiell (1916–2002)

  • References

    Achilles, P. S. (Ed.). (1932). Psychology at work. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Alexander, I. (1993). Science and the single case. In K. H.Craik, R.Hogan, & R. N.Wolfe (Eds.), Fifty years of personality psychology (pp. 119–129). New York: Plenum.
    Allport, G. W. (1937a). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
    Allport, G. W. (1937b). The personalistic psychology of William Stern. Character and Personality, 5, 231–246.
    Allport, G. W. (1938). William Stern: 1871–1938. The American Journal of Psychology, 51, 770–773.
    Allport, G. W. (1946). Personalistic psychology as science: A reply. Psychological Review, 53, 132–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0058477
    Allport, G. W. (1955). Becoming: Basic considerations for a psychology of personality. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
    Allport, G. W. (1962). The general and the unique in psychological science. Journal of Personality, 30, 405–422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02313.x
    Allport, G. W. (1966). Traits revisited. American Psychologist, 21, 1–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0023295
    Allport, G. W. (1968). The person in psychology: Selected essays by Gordon W. Allport. Boston: Beacon.
    Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait names: A psycholexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47(Whole No. 211).
    Anders, G. (1950). “Bild meines Vaters” (“Portrait of my father”); a foreword to William Stern'sAllgemeine Psychologie auf personalistischen Grundlage (zweite unveränderte ed., pp. xxiii–xxxii). Den Haag, Netherlands: Nijhoff.
    Anders, G. (1971). Die geköpfte Lilie: Erinnerung an den Vater [The beheaded lily: A recollection of my father]. Süddeutsche Zeitung, pp. 115.
    Angleitner, A. (1991). Personality psychology: Trends and developments. European Journal of Personality, 5, 185–197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.2410050302
    Asendorpf, J. (1991). Die differentielle Sichtweise in der Psychologie [The differential perspective in psychology]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
    Ash, M. (1995). Gestalt psychology in German culture, 1890–1967. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Bakan, D. (1966). The test of significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 66, 423–437. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0020412
    Bamberg, M. (2000). Critical personalism, language, and development. Theory and psychology, 10, 749–767. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354300106003
    Barrett, W. (1978). The illusion of technique. New York: Anchor Books.
    Bauer, I. (2000). Thoughts about race and multiculturalism in the U.S.A. The Funnel: The Newsmagazine of the German-American Fulbright Commission, 36, 2, 30–32.
    Beck, L. W. (1941). William Stern's philosophy of value. The Personalist, 22, 353–363.
    Beck, S. J. (1953). The science of personality: Nomothetic or idiographic?Psychological Review, 60, 353–359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0055330
    Behrens, H., & Deutsch, W. (1991). Die Tagebücher von Clara und William Stern [The diaries of Clara and William Stern]. In W.Deutsch (Ed.), Über die verborgene Aktualität von William Stern (pp. 19–37). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
    Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. M. (1985). Habits of the heart: Individualism and commitment in American life. New York: Harper & Row.
    Bem, D. J., & Allen, A. (1974). On predicting some of the people some of the time: The search for cross-situational consistencies in behavior. Psychological Review, 81, 506–520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0037130
    Binet, A., & Henri, V. (1896). La psychologie individuelle [Individual psychology]. Annee psychologie, 2, 411–465. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/psy.1895.1541
    Blumenthal, H. (1975). A reappraisal of Wilhelm Wundt. American Psychologist, 30, 1081–1088. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.30.11.1081
    Brand-Auraban, A. (1972). William Stern's philosophy of personalism and value. Korort (Hebrew) Quarterly for the History of Medicine and Science, 5, 808–813.
    Brunswik, E. (1943). Organismic achievement and environmental probability. The Psychological Review, 50, 255–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0060889
    Buckle, H. T. (1898). A history of civilization in England (
    2nd London ed.
    ). New York: D. Appleton. (Original work published 1857).
    Budescu, D. (1980). Some new measures of profile dissimilarity. Applied Psychological Measurement, 4, 261–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014662168000400212
    Bühring, G. (1996a). William Stern oder Streben nach Einheit [William Stern, or the quest for unity]. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
    Bühring, G. (1996b). Titelbibliographie zu und über William Stern [Bibliography of works by and about William Stern]. Unpublished manuscript, Berlin.
    Bühring, G. (1997). Dem Psychologen und Philosophen William Stern (1871–1938) zum 125. Geburtstag [To the psychologist and philosopher William Stern (18711938) on the 125 anniversary of his birth]. Report Psychologie, 22, 366–373.
    Burt, C. L. (1937). Correlation between persons. British Journal of Psychology, 28, 59–96.
    Buss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1983). The act frequency approach to personality. Psychological Review, 90, 105–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.90.2.105
    Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0046016
    Carlson, R. (1971). Where is the person in personality research?Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 203–214.
    Cattell, J. M. (1890). Mental tests and measurements. Mind, 15, 373–380. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mind/os-XV.59.373
    Cattell, R. B. (1944). Psychological measurement: Normative, ipsative, interactive. Psychological Review, 51, 292–303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0057299
    Cattell, R. B. (1950). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Cattell, R. B. (1952). The three basic factor-analytic research designs–their inter-relations and derivatives. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 499–520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0054245
    Cattell, R. B. (1957). Personality and motivation: Structure and measurement. New York: World Book Company.
    Cloninger, S. C. (1996). Personality: Description, dynamics and development. New York: Freeman.
    Cohn, J. (1932). Wertwissenschaft [Science of values]. Stuttgart: Frommans.
    Cohen, J. (1968). Multiple regression as a general data analytic system. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 292–303.
    Conger, A. (1983). Toward a further understanding of the intuitive personologist: Some critical evidence on the diabolical quality of subjective psychometrics. Journal of Personality, 51, 292–303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00866.x
    Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEOPI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
    Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671–684. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0043943
    Cronbach, L. J., & Gleser, G. (1953). Assessing similarity between profiles. Psychological Bulletin, 50, 456–473. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0057173
    Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0040957
    Danziger, K. (1979). The positivistic repudiation of Wundt. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 15, 205–230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696%28197907%2915:3%3C205::AID-JHBS2300150303%3E3.0.CO;2-P
    Danziger, K. (1987). Statistical method and the historical development of research practice in American psychology. In L.Krueger, G.Gigerenzer, & M. S.Morgan (Eds.), The probabilistic revolution, Vol. 2: Ideas in the sciences (pp. 35–47). Cambridge: MIT Press.
    Danziger, K. (1990). Constructing the subject: Historical origins of psychological research. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511524059
    Dar, R., & Serlin, R. C. (1990). For whom the bell curve toils: Universality in individual differences research. In D. N.Robinson & L. P.Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 193–199). New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0631-3_12
    Darlington, R. (1968). Multiple regression in psychological research and practice. Psychological Bulletin, 69, 161–182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0025471
    Daston, L. (1988). Classical probability in the Enlightenment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Deutsch, W. (1997). Im Mittelpunkt die Person: Der Psychologe und Philosoph William Stern (1871–1938) [In the center the person: The psychologist and philosopher William Stern (1871–1938)]. In M.Hassler & J.Wertheimer (Eds.), Der Exodus aus Nazideutschland und die Folgen: Jüdische Wissenschaftler im Exil (pp. 73–90). Tübingen: Attempto.
    Digman, J. M. (1989). Five robust trait dimensions: Development, stability, and utility. Journal of Personality, 57, 195–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1989.tb00480.x
    Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model (Vol. 41). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
    Dilthey, W. (1894). Ideen über eine beschreibende und zergliedernde Psychologie [Toward a descriptive and analytical psychology]. Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, zweiter Halbband, 1309–1407.
    Drobisch, M. W. (1867). Die moralische Statistik und die menschliche Willensfreiheit: Eine Untersuchung [A study of moral statistics and human free will]. Leipzig.
    Dürr-Borst, M. (1906). Die Erziehung der Aussage und Anschauung des Schulkindes [Training school-aged children with respect to testimony and perspective]. Die experimentelle Pädagogik, 3, 1–30.
    Ebbinghaus, H. (1885/1964). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology (H. A.Ruger & C. E.Bussenius, Trans.). New York: Dover.
    Ebbinghaus, H. (1896a). Über eine neue Methode zur prüfung geistige Fähigkeiten und ihre Anwendung bei Schulkindern [A new method for testing mental abilities and its application with school children]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie der Sinnesorgane, 13, 401–457.
    Ebbinghaus, H. (1896b). Über erklärende und beschreibende Psychologie [On explanatory and descriptive psychology]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane, 9, 161–205.
    Ebbinghaus, H. (Ed.). (1897). Grundzüge der Psychologie [Foundations of psychology] (Vols. 1 & 2). Leipzig: Feit.
    Ebbinghaus, H. (1908). Psychology: An elementary textbook (M.Meyer, Trans.). Boston: D.C. Heath. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/13638-000
    Ekehammar, B. (1974). Interactionism in personality psychology from a historical perspective. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 1026–1048. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0037457
    Endler, N. S., & Magnussoon, D. (1976). Toward an interactional psychology of personality. Psychological Bulletin, 83, 956–974. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.83.5.956
    Epstein, S. (1977). Traits are alive and well. In N. S.Endler & D.Magnusson (Eds.), Personality at the crossroads: Current issues in interactional psychology (pp. 83–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    Epstein, S. (1979). The stability of behavior: I. On predicting most of the people most of the time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1097–1126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.7.1097
    Epstein, S. (1980). The stability of behavior: II. Implications for psychological research. American Psychologist, 35, 790–806. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.35.9.790
    Epstein, S. (1983). Aggregation and beyond: Some basic issues in the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality, 51, 360–392. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00338.x
    Eysenck, H. J. (1952). The scientific study of personality. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    Eysenck, H. J. (1954). The science of personality: Nomothetic!Psychological Review, 61, 339–342. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0058333
    Eysenck, H. J. (1990). Differential psychology before and after William Stern. Psychologische Beiträge, 32, 249–262.
    Fancher, R. E. (1985). The intelligence men: Makers of the IQ controversy. New York: W. W. Norton.
    Feger, B. (1991). William Sterns Bedeutung für die Hochbegabungsforschung–die Bedeutung der Hochbegabungsforschung für William Stern [William Stern's significance for research on the highly talented–and the significance of research on the highly talented for William Stern]. In W.Deutsch (Ed.), Die verborgene Aktualität von William Stern (pp. 93–108). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
    Folstein, M., Folstein, S., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956%2875%2990026-6
    Freud, S. (1900). Die Traumdeutung [The interpretation of dreams]. Leipzig und Wien: Deuticke.
    Galton, F. (1865). Hereditary talent and character. In R.Jacoby & N.Glauberman (Eds.), The bell curve debate: History, documents, opinions (pp. 393–409). New York: Times Books/Random House.
    Garrett, H. E. (1966). Statistics in psychology and education. New York: David McKay Company.
    Gergen, K. J. (1991). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic Books.
    Gergen, K. J. (1992). Social construction and moral action. In D. N.Robinson (Ed.), Social discourse and moral judgment (pp. 9–27). New York: Academic Press.
    Gergen, K. J. (1994). Realities and relationships. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Gergen, K. J. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London: Sage.
    Gibson, J. J. (1985). Conclusions from a century of research on sense perception. In S.Koch & D. E.Leary (Eds.), A century of psychology as science (pp. 224–230). New York: McGraw-Hill. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10117-025
    Gigerenzer, G. (1987). Probabilistic thinking and the fight against subjectivity. In G.Gigerenzer, L.Krueger, & M. S.Morgan (Eds.), The probabilistic revolution, Vol. 2: Ideas in the sciences (Vol. 2, pp. 11–33). Cambridge: MIT Press.
    Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.48.1.26
    Goldfried, M. R., & Kent, R. N. (1972). Traditional versus behavioral personality assessment: A comparison of methodological and theoretical assumptions. Psychological Bulletin, 77, 409–420. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0032714
    Gordon, M. (2002). Veiled meanings. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 166, 482.
    Graf-Nold, A. (1991). Stern versus Freud: Die Kontroverse um die KinderPsychoanalyse–Vorgeschichte und Folgen [Stern versus Freud: The controversy over childhood psychoanalysis–Background and consequences]. In W.Deutsch (Ed.), Die verborgene Aktualität von William Stern (pp. 49–91). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
    Graumann, C. F. (1980). Wundt vor Leipzig–Entwürfe einer Psychologie [Wundt before Leipzig–Outlines of a psychology]. In W.Meischner & A.Metge (Eds.), Wilhelm Wundt: Progressives Erbe, Wissenschaftsentwicklung und Gegenwart (pp. 63–77). Leipzig: Verlag Karl-Marx-Universität.
    Graziano, W. G., & Eisenberg, N. H. (1997). Agreeableness: A dimension of personality. In R.Hogan, J.Johnson, & S.Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 795–824). New York: Academic Press.
    Grünwald, H. (1980). Die sozialen Ursprünge psychologischer Diagnostik [The social origins of psychological diagnosis]. Darmstadt: Steinkopf.
    Guilford, J. P. (1954). Psychometric methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Guilford, J. P. (1959). Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Hacking, I. (1990). The taming of chance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Hake, A. (2001). Was sagen gruppenstatistische Kennwerte über den Einzelfall aus? Ein Text-und Übungsbuch [What do aggregate statistics reveal about the single case? A text and workbook]. Landau: Verlag Empirische Pädagogik.
    Hanfmann, E. (1952). William Stern on “projective techniques.”Journal of Personality, 21, 1–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1952.tb01856.x
    Hanson, F. A. (1993). Testing testing: Social consequences of the examined life. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    Hardesty, F. P. (1976). Louis William Stern: A new view of the Hamburg years. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 270, 31–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1976.tb34214.x
    Hardesty, F. P. (1977). William Stern and American psychology: A preliminary analysis of contributions and contexts. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 291, 33–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1977.tb53057.x
    Harré, R. (1984). Personal being. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Harré, R. (2000). Personalism in the context of a social constructionist psychology. Theory and Psychology, 10, 731–748.
    Harré, R. (2002). Public sources of the personal mind: Social constructionism in context. Theory and Psychology, 12, 611–623.
    Harré, R., & Gillett, G. (1994). The discursive mind. London: Sagehttp://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452243788.
    Harrington, A. (1996). Reenchanted science: Holism in German culture from Wilhelm II to Hitler. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Hartshorne, H., & May, M. A. (1928). Studies in the nature of character, Vol 1: Studies in deceit. New York: Macmillan.
    Hartshorne, H., & May, M. A. (1929). Studies in the nature of character, Vol. 2: Studies in service and self-control. New York: Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/11334-000
    Hartshorne, H., May, M. A., & Shuttleworth, F. K. (1930). Studies in the nature of character, Vol. 3: Studies in the organization of character. New York: Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/13357-000
    Hase, H. D., & Goldberg, L. R. (1967). Comparative validity of different strategies of constructing personality inventory scales. Psychological Bulletin, 67, 231–248. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0024421
    Hermans, H. (2000). Valuation, innovation and critical personalism. Theory and Psychology, 10, 801–814. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354300106006
    Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve: Intelligence and class structure in American life. New York: Free Press.
    Hogan, J., & Hogan, R. (1989). How to measure employee reliability. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 273–279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.2.273
    Hogan, R., Hogan, J., & Roberts, B. W. (1996). Personality measurement and employment decisions: Questions and answers. American Psychologist, 51, 469–477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.51.5.469
    Hogan, R., Johnson, J., & Briggs, S. (Eds.). (1997). Handbook of personality psychology. New York: Academic Press.
    Hogan, R., & Ones, D. S. (1997). Conscientiousness and integrity at work. R.Hogan, J.Johnson, & S.Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology. New York: Academic Press.
    Holt, R. W. (1962). Individuality and generalization in the psychology of personality. Journal of Personality, 30, 377–404. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1962.tb02312.x
    Hothersall, D. (1995). History of psychology (
    3rd ed.
    ). New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Huber, R. J., Edwards, C., & Heining-Boynton, D. (Eds.). (2000). Cornerstones of psychology: Readings in the history of psychology. New York: Harcourt Brace.
    Hug-Hellmuth, H. von. (1913). Aus dem Seelenleben des Kindes: Eine psychoanalytische Studie [From the psychological life of the child: A psychoanalytic study]. In S.Freud (Ed.), 15, Heft der schriften zur angewandten Seelenkunde. Wien.
    Jacoby, R., & Glauberman, N. (Eds.). (1995). The bell curve debate: History, documents, opinions. New York: Times Books.
    John, O., & Robins, R. W. (1993). Gordon Allport: Father and critic of the five-factor model. In K. H.Craik, R.Hogan, & R. N.Wolfe (Eds.), Fifty years of personality psychology (pp. 215–236). New York: Plenum.
    Johnson, J. A. (1997). Units of analysis for the description and explanation of personality. In R.Hogan, J.Johnson, & S.Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 73–93). New York: Academic Press.
    Kerlinger, F. N., & Pedhazur, E. J. (1974). Multiple regression in behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
    Kimble, G. A. (1993). Evolution of the nature-nurture issue in the history of psychology. In R. C.Plomin, & G. E.McClearn (Eds.), Nature, nurture, & psychology (pp. 3–25). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Books. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10131-001
    Kleinmuntz, B. (1967). Personality measurement: An introduction. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
    Kreppner, K. (1992). William L. Stern: A neglected founder of developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 28, 539–547. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.28.4.539
    Krueger, F., & Spearman, C. (1906). Die Korrelation zwischen verschiedenen geistigen Leistungsfähigkeiten [The correlation between various mental abilities]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane, 44, 50–114.
    Lamiell, J. T. (1981). Toward an idiothetic psychology of personality. American Psychologist, 36, 276–289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.3.276
    Lamiell, J. T. (1987). The psychology of personality: An epistemological inquiry. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Lamiell, J. T. (1990a). Explanation in the psychology of personality. In D. N.Robinson & L. P.Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 153–192). New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0631-3_11
    Lamiell, J. T. (1990b). Let's be careful out there: Reply to commentaries. In D. N.Robinson & L. P.Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 219–231). New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0631-3_15
    Lamiell, J. T. (1991). Problems with the notion of uncertainty reduction as valid explanation. Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 11, 99–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0091520
    Lamiell, J. T. (1992). Persons, selves, and agency. In D. N.Robinson (Ed.), Social discourse and moral judgment (pp. 29–41). San Diego: Academic Press.
    Lamiell, J. T. (1995). Rethinking the role of quantitative methods in psychology. In J.Smith, R.Harré, & L.van Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking methods in psychology (pp. 143–161). London: Sage. http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446221792
    Lamiell, J. T. (1996). William Stern: More than “the IQ guy.” In G. A.Kimble, C. A.Boneau, & M.Wertheimer (Eds.), Portraits of pioneers in psychology (Vol. II, pp. 73–85). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Books; Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Lamiell, J. T. (1997). Individuals and the differences between them. In R.Hogan, J.Johnson, & S.Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 117–141). New York: Academic Press.
    Lamiell, J. T. (1998). “Nomothetic” and “idiographic”: Contrasting Windelband's understanding with contemporary usage. Theory and Psychology, 10, 715–730. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354300106001
    Lamiell, J. T. (2000). A periodic table of personality elements? The “Big Five” and trait “psychology” in critical perspective. The Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 20, 1–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0091211
    Lamiell, J. T., & Deutsch, W. (2000). In the light of a star. An introduction to William Stern's critical personalism. Theory and Psychology, 10, 715–730. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354300106001
    Lamiell, J. T., & Durbeck, P. (1987). Whence cognitive prototypes in impression formation? Some empirical evidence for dialectical reasoning as a generative process. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 8, 223–244.
    Lamiell, J. T., Foss, M. A., Larsen, R. J., & Hempel, A. (1983). Studies in intuitive personology from and idiothetic point of view: Implications for personality theory. Journal of Personality, 51, 438–467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00340.x
    Lamiell, J. T., Foss, M. A., Trierweiler, S. J., & Leffel, G. M. (1983). Toward a further understanding of the intuitive personologist: Some preliminary evidence for the dialectical quality of subjective personality impressions. Journal of Personality, 53, 213–235. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00864.x
    Lamiell, J. T., & Trierweiler, S. J. (1986). Interactive measurement, idiothetic inquiry, and the challenge to conventional “nomotheticism.”Journal of Personality, 54, 460–469. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1986.tb00405.x
    Lamiell, J. T., Trierweiler, S. J., & Foss, M. A. (1983). Theoretical vs. actual analyses of personality ratings, and other rudimentary distinctions. Journal of Personality, 51, 259–274. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00867.x
    Leahey, T. H. (2001). A history of modern psychology (
    3rd ed.
    ). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Levy, L. (1970). Conceptions of personality. New York: Random House.
    Lewin, K. (1935). Dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Loehlin, J. C. (1992). Genes and environment in personality development. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Lück, H. E., & Löwisch, D.-J. (Eds.). (1994). Der Briefwechsel zwischen William Stern und Jonas Cohn: Dokumente einer Freundschaft zwischen zwei Wissenschaftlern [Letters between William Stern and Jonas Cohn: Documents of a friendship between two scientists]. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
    Lundberg, G. A. (1941). Case-studies vs. statistical methods–An issue based on misunderstanding. Sociometry, 4, 379–383. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2785142
    MacLeod, R. B. (1938). William Stern (1871–1938). Psychological Review, 45, 347–353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0058537
    May, M. A. (1932). The foundations of personality. In A. S.Achilles (Ed.), Psychology at work (pp. 81–101). New York: McGraw-Hill.
    McCall, W. A. (1939). Measurement. New York: Macmillan.
    McClelland, D. C. (1951). Personality. New York: Sloane. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10790-000
    McCrae, R. R. (2000). Trait psychology and the revival of personality and cultural studies. American Behavioral Scientist, 44, 10–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00027640021956062
    McCrae, R. R. (2001). Facts and interpretations of personality trait stability: A reply to Quackenbush. Theory and Psychology, 11, 837–844. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354301116009
    McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1986). Clinical assessment can benefit from recent advances in personality psychology. American Psychologist, 41, 1001–1003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.1001
    McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 81–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
    McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1995). Trait explanations in personality psychology. European Journal of Personality, 9, 231–252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/per.2410090402
    McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1997). Conceptions and correlates of openness to experience. In R.Hogan, J.Johnson, & S.Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 826–847). New York: Academic Press.
    Meehl, P. E. (1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 806–834. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.46.4.806
    Michaelis-Stern, E. (1991). Erinnerungen an meine Eltern [Recollections of my parents]. In W.Deutsch (Ed.), Die verborgene Aktualität von William Stern (pp. 131–141). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
    Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley.
    Moghaddam, F., Taylor, D. M., & Wright, S. (1993). Social psychology in crosscultural perspective. New York: Freeman.
    Münsterberg, H. (1900). Grundzüge der Psychologie [Foundations of psychology]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Münsterberg, H. (1913). Psychology and industrial efficiency. Boston and New York: Houghton-Mifflin.
    Murchison, C. (Ed.). (1930). A history of psychology in autobiography. New York: Russell & Russell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/11401-000
    Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Ozer, D. J. (1990). Individual differences and the explanation of behavior. In D. N.Robinson, & L. P.Mos (Eds.), Annals of theoretical psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 201–209). New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0631-3_13
    Paunonen, S. V., & Jackson, D. N. (1986a). Idiothetic inquiry and toil of Sisyphus. Journal of Personality, 54, 470–477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1986.tb00406.x
    Paunonen, S. V., & Jackson, D. N. (1986b). Nomothetic and idiothetic measurement in personality. Journal of Personality, 54, 447–459. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1986.tb00404.x
    Pawlik, K. (1992). Don't worry! Traits exist. Paper presented at the Sixth European Conference of Personality, Groningen, the Netherlands.
    Pawlik, K. (1994). Einleitung (Introduction). In K.Pawlik (Ed.), Die Differentielle Psychologie in ihren methodischen Grundlagen (pp. 13–21). Göttingen: Hans Huber.
    Pearson, K. R. (1901–1902). Editorial. Biometrika, 1, 3.
    Pearson, K. R. (1903). On breeding good stock. In R.Jacoby, & N.Glauberman (Eds.), The bell curve debate: History, documents, opinions (pp. 410–416). New York: Times Books/Random House.
    Pekrun, R. (1996). Geschichte von Differentieller Psychologie und Persönlichkeitspsychologie [History of differential psychology and personality research]. In K.Pawlik & M.Amelang (Eds.), Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, Serie 8: Differentielle Psychologie und Persönlichkeitsforschung, Band I: Grundlagen und Methoden der differentiellen Psychologie (pp. 83–123). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
    Pervin, L. (1994). A critical analysis of current trait theory. Psychological Inquiry, 5, 103–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0502_1
    Plomin, R. C. (1993). Nature and nurture: Perspective and prospective. In R. C.Plomin & G. E.McClearn (Eds.), Nature, nurture, & psychology (pp. 459–485). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Books. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10131-046
    Plomin, R. C. (1994). Genetics and experience: The interplay between nature and nurture. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Porter, T. M. (1986). The rise of statistical thinking: 1820–1900. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Porter, T. M. (1995). Trust in numbers. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Probst, P. (1989). Ernst Meumann als Begründer der empirischen Psychologie in Hamburg [Ernst Meumann as founder of empirical psychology in Hamburg]. Psychologie und Geschichte, 1, 6–16.
    Probst, P. (1997). The beginnings of educational psychology in Germany. In W. G.Bringmann, H. E.Lück, R.Miller, & C. E.Early (Eds.), A pictorial history of psychology (pp. 315–321). Chicago: Quintessence.
    Quackenbush, S. W. (2001a). Trait stability as a noncontingent truth: A pre-empirical critique of McCrae and Costa's stability thesis. Theory and Psychology, 11, 818–836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354301116008
    Quackenbush, S. W. (2001b). Reliability as a value in personality research: A rejoinder to McCrae. Theory and Psychology, 11, 845–851. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354301116010
    Renner, K.-H., & Laux, L. (2000). Unitas multiplex, purposiveness, individuality: Contrasting Stern's conception of the person with Gergen's saturated self. Theory and Psychology, 10, 831–846. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354300106008
    Ringer, F. (1969). The decline of the German Mandarins: The German academic community, 1890–1933. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Robinson, D. N. (1985). Philosophy of psychology. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Robinson, D. N. (1989). Aristotle's psychology. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Robinson, D. N. (1995). An intellectual history of psychology (
    3rd ed.
    ). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
    Robinson, D. N., & Mos, L. P. (Eds.). (1990). Annals of theoretical psychology. New York: Plenum. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-0631-3
    Rosenzweig, S. (1958). The place of the individual and of idiodynamics in psychology: A dialogue. Journal of Individual Psychology, 59, 339–345.
    Rowe, D. C. (1997). Genetics, temperament, and personality. In R.Hogan, J.Johnson, & S.Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 369–386). New York: Academic Press.
    Rucci, A. J., & Tweney, R. D. (1980). Analysis of variance and the “second discipline” of scientific psychology: A historical account. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 166–184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.87.1.166
    Rümelin, G. (1875). Über den Begriff eines sozialen Gesetzes [On the concept of a social law]. In G.Rümelin (Ed.), Reden und Aufsätze (pp. 1–31). Freiburg.
    Runyan, W. M. (1982). Life histories and psychobiography. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Rychlak, J. F. (1976). Personality theory: Its nature, past, present, and–future?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2, 209–224. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014616727600200302
    Rychlak, J. F. (1979). Discovering free will and personal responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Rychlak, J. F. (1981). A philosophy of science for personality theory (
    2nd ed.
    ). Malaber, FL: Krieger.
    Rychlak, J. F. (1988). The psychology of rigorous humanism (
    2nd ed.
    ). New York: New York University Press.
    Rychlak, J. F. (1991). Artificial intelligence and human reason: A teleological critique. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Rychlak, J. F. (1997). In defense of human consciousness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10231-000
    Sabat, S. R. (2000). Time past, time present, time future: The Alzheimer's disease sufferer as Stern's unitas multiplex. Theory and psychology, 10, 787–800. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354300106005
    Sabat, S. R. (2001). The experience of Alzheimer's disease: Life through a tangled veil. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
    Sabat, S. R., & Harre, R. (1994). The Alzheimer's disease sufferer as a semiotic subject. Philosophy, Psychiatry, Psychology, 1, 145–160.
    Samelson, F. (1977). World War I intelligence testing and the development of psychology. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 13, 274–282. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696%28197707%2913:3%3C274::AID-JHBS2300130308%3E3.0.CO;2-K
    Samelson, F. (1979). Putting psychology on the map: Ideology and intelligence testing. In A. R.Buss (Ed.), Psychology in social context (pp. 103–168). New York: Irvington.
    Sanborn, H. (1939). An examination of William Stern's philosophy. Character and Personality, 7, 318–330.
    Sanford, N. (1963). Personality: Its place in psychology. In S.Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of a science (Vol. 5, pp. 488–592). New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Sarbin, T. R. (1944). The logic of prediction in psychology. Psychological Review, 51, 210–228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0057400
    Saudino, K. J., & Eaton, W. O. (1991). Infant temperament and genetics: An objective twin study of motor activity level. Child Development, 62, 1167–1174. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1131160
    Schmidt, R. (Ed.). (1927). Philosophie der Gegenwart in Selbstdarstellung [Contemporary philosophy in self-portraits]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Schmidt, W. (1991a). Sehnsucht nach Weltanschauung: William Stern um die Jahrhundertwende [The longing for a worldview: William Stern at the turn of the century]. Psychologie und Geschichte, 3, 1–8.
    Schmidt, W. (1991b). William Stern–Günther Anders: Zwei Generationen, zwei Welten [William Stern–Günther Anders: Two generations, two worlds]. In W.Deutsch (Ed.), Die verborgene Aktualität von William Stern (pp. 117–129). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Verlag.
    Schmidt, W. (1994). William Stern (1871–1938) und Lewis Terman (1877–1956): Deutsche und amerikanische Intelligenz-und Begabungsforschung im Lichte ihrer andersartigen politischen und ideologischen Voraussssetzungen [William Stern (1871–1938) and Lewis Terman (1877–1956): German and American research on intelligence and aptitude in the light of different political and ideological circumstances]. Psychologie und Geschichte, 6, 3–26.
    Shotter, J. (1993). Conversational realities: Constructing life through language. London: Sage.
    Skaggs, E. B. (1945). Personalistic psychology as science. Psychological Review, 52, 234–238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0054084
    Slife, B., & Williams, R. N. (1995). What's behind the research? Discovering hidden assumptions in the behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Sokal, M. M. (1990). James McKeen Cattell and mental anthropometry: Nineteenth century science and reform and the origins of psychological testing. In M. M.Sokal (Ed.), Psychological testing and American society (pp. 21–45). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
    Spearman, C. (1904). “General intelligence” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–292. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1412107
    Spoerl, H. D. (1938). William Stern. The Personalist, 19, 309–311.
    Staeuble, I. (1983). William Stern's research program of differential psychology: Why did psychotechnics outstrip psychognostics? Paper presented at the Cheiron Society, Toronto, Canada.
    Stephenson. (1952). Some observations in Q-methodology. Psychological Bulletin, 49, 483–498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0057171
    Stern, C., & Stern, W. (1907). Die Kindersprache [Children's speech]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, C., & Stern, W. (1909). Erinnerung, Aussage, und Lüge in der ersten Kindheit [Recollection, testimony, and lying in early childhood]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, C., & Stern, W. (1999). Recollection, testimony, and lying in early childhood (J. T.Lamiell, Trans.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10324-000
    Stern, W. (1894). Die Wahrnehmung von Bewegungen vermittelst des Auges [The visual perception of movements]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane, 7, 321–385.
    Stern, W. (1899). Ein Beitrag zur differentiellen Psychologie des Urtheilens [A contribution to the differential psychology of judgment]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane, 22, 13–22.
    Stern, W. (1900a). Über Psychologie der individuellen Differenzen (Ideen zu einer “differentiellen Psychologie”) [On the psychology of individual differences (Toward a “differential psychology”)]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1900b). Über die ethische Bedeutung von Toleranz [On the ethical significance of tolerance]. Unpublished manuscript, Breslau.
    Stern, W. (1901). S. Freud. Die Traumdeutung (Rezension). [S. Freud. The interpretation of dreams (A review)]. Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane, 26, 130–133.
    Stern, W. (1906). Person und Sache: System der philosophischen Weltanschauung. Erster Band: Ableitung und Grundlehre [Person and thing: A systematic philosophical worldview. Volume 1: Rationale and basic tenets]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1908). Tatsachen und Ursachen der seelischen Entwicklung [Facts about and causes of psychological development]. Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie und psychologische Sammelforschung, 1, 1–43.
    Stern, W. (1910). Abstracts of lectures on the psychology of testimony and on the study of individuality (E. C.Sanford, Trans.). The American Journal of Psychology, 21, 270–282. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1413003
    Stern, W. (1911). Die Differentielle Psychologie in ihren methodischen Grundlagen [Methodological foundations of differential psychology]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1912). Die psychologischen Methoden der Intelligenzprüfung [The psychological methods of intelligence testing]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1914a). Psychologie der frühen Kindheit bis zum sechsten Lebensjahr [Psychology of early childhood up to the sixth year of life]. Leipzig: Quelle & Meyer.
    Stern, W. (1914b). Die Anwendung der Psychoanalyse auf Kindheit und Jugend. Ein Protest. Mit einem Anhang von Clara und William Stern: Kritik einer Freudschen Psychoanalyse [The application of psychoanalysis to children and adolescents. A protest. With an appendix by Clara and William Stern: Critique of a Freudian psychoanalysis]. Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie und psychologische Sammelforschung, 8, 71–101.
    Stern, W. (1914c). Psychologie [Psychology]. In D.Sarason (Ed.), Das Jahr 1913: Ein Gesamtbild der Kulturentwicklung (pp. 414–421). Leipzig: Teubner.
    Stern, W. (1915). Vorgedanken zur Weltanschauung [Preliminary ideas toward a worldview]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1916). Der Intelligenzquotient als Maß der kindlichen Intelligenz, insbesondere der Unternormalen [The intelligence quotient as a measure of intelligence in children, with special reference to the sub-normal child]. Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie, 11, 1–18.
    Stern, W. (1917). Die Psychologie und der Personalismus [Psychology and personalism]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1918a). Person und Sache: System der philosophischen Weltanschauung. Zweiter Band: Die menschliche Persönlichkeit [Person and thing: A systematic philosophical worldview. Volume Two: The human personality]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1918b). Grundgedanken der personalistischen Philosophie [Conceptual foundations of personalistic philosophy]. In A.Liebert (Ed.), Philosophische Vorträge. Berlin: Reuther & Reichard.
    Stern, W. (1921). Richtlinien für die Methodik der psychologischen Praxis [Guidelines for a method of psychological pratice]. Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie, 29, 1–16.
    Stern, W. (1923). Person und Sache. System der philosophischen Weltanschauung. Zweiter Band: Die menschliche Persönlichkeit (dritte unveränderte Auflage) [Person and thing: A systematic philosophical worldview. Volume 2: The human personality (3rd unrev. ed.)]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1924a). Psychology of early childhood up to the sixth year of age (A.Barwell, Trans.). London: Allen & Unwin. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/11539-000
    Stern, W. (1924b). Person und Sache: System der kritischen Personalismus. Dritter Band: Wertphilosophie [Person and thing: The system of critical personalism. Volume 3: Philosophy of value]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1925a). Anfänge der Reifezeit: Ein Knabentagebuch in psychologischer Bearbeitung [Beginnings of maturity: A psychological analysis of a boy's diary]. Leipzig: Quelle & Meyer.
    Stern, W. (1925b). Aus dreijährige Arbeit des Hamburger Psychologischen Laboratoriums [3-year report on work at the Hamburg Psychological Laboratory). Zeitschrift für pädagogische Psychologie, 26, 289–307.
    Stern, W. (1927). Selbstdarstellung [Self-portrayal]. In R.Schmidt (Ed.), Philosophie der Gegenwart in Selbstdarstellung (Vol. 6, pp. 128–184). Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1929). Persönlichkeitsforschung und Testmethode [Personality research and the methods of testing]. Jahrbuch der Charaketerologie, 6, 63–72.
    Stern, W. (1930a). William Stern autobiography (S.Langer, Trans.). In C.Murchison (Ed.), A history of psychology in autobiography (Vol. 1, pp. 335–388). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/11401-011
    Stern, W. (1930b). Studien zur Personwissenschaft. Erster Teil: Personalistik als Wissenschaft [Studies in the science of persons: Personalism as science]. Leipzig: Barth.
    Stern, W. (1933). Der personale Faktor in Psychotechnik und praktischer Psychologie [The personal factor in psychotechnics and practical psychology]. Zeitschrift für angewandte Psychologie, 44, 52–63.
    Stern, W. (1935). Allgemeine Psychologie auf personalistischer Grundlage [General psychology from the personalistic standpoint]. Den Haag, Netherlands: Nijhoff.
    Stern, W. (1938). General psychology from the personalistic standpoint (H.Spoerl, Trans.). New York: Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/11642-000
    Stigler, S. M. (1986). The history of statistics: The measurement of uncertainty before 1900. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, Harvard University Press.
    Thorndike, E. L. (1909). A note on the accuracy of discrimination of weights and lengths. Psychological Review, 16, 340–346. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0069982
    Thorndike, E. L. (1911). Individuality. New York: Houghton-Mifflin.
    Tissaw, M. (2000). Psychological symbiosis: Personalistic and constructionist considerations. Theory and psychology, 10, 847–876. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0959354300106009
    Toulouse, E. (1896). Enquete medico-psychologie sur les rapports de la superiorite intellectuelle avec la nevropathie. I. Introduction generale. Emile Zola [A psycho-medical survey of the relationship between intellectual superiority and nervous disorder. I. General introduction. Emile Zola]. Paris: Flammarion.
    Toulouse, E. (1910). Enquete medico-psychologie sur la superiorite intellectuelle. Henri Poincaré [A psycho-medical survey of intellectual superiority. Henri Poincaré]. Paris: Flammarion.
    Tryon, W. W. (1991a). Uncertainty reduction as valid explanation. Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 11, 91–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0091519
    Tryon, W. W. (1991b). Further support for uncertainty reduction as valid explanation. Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 11, 106–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0091508
    Tyler, L. E. (1959). Toward a workable psychology of individuality. American Psychologist, 14, 75–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0040206
    Tyler, L. E. (1978). Individuality: Human possibilities and personal choice in the psychological development of men and women. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Tyler, L. E. (1984). Some neglected insights in personology. Unpublished manuscript, Eugene, OR.
    Valsiner, J. (1986). Between groups and individuals: Psychologists’ and laypersons’ interpretations of correlational findings. In J.Valsiner (Ed.), The individual subject and scientific psychology (pp. 113–151). New York: Plenum.
    Venn, J. (1888). The logic of chance. London/New York: Macmillan.
    Wagner, A. (1864). Die Gesetzmäßigkeit in den scheinbar willkürlichen menschlichen Handlungen vom Standpunkt der Statistik [Lawfulness in deceptively arbitrary actions from the standpoint of statistics]. Hamburg.
    Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In R.Hogan, J.Johnson, & S.Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 767–793). New York: Academic Press.
    Weigert, S. C. (2000). The predictive accuracy of normative and interactive frameworks for personality measurement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C.
    Werner, H. (1939). William Stern's personalistics and psychology of personality. Character and Personality, 7, 109–125.
    Wiggins, J. S. (1973). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
    Wiggins, J. S. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 395–412. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.3.395
    Wiggins, J. S., & Trapnell, P. D. (1997). Personality structure: The return of the Big Five. In R.Hogan, J.Johnson, & S.Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 737–765). New York: Academic Press.
    Windelband, W. (1998). History and natural science (J. T.Lamiell, Trans.). Strassburg: Heitz. (Original work published 1894).
    Winkler, L. (2000). Culture shock, or what I wasn't prepared for. The Funnel: The Newsmagazine of the German-American Fulbright Commission, 36, 10.
    Wissler. (1901). The correlation of mental and physical tests (Series of Monograph Supplements). The Psychological Review3(6).
    Woody, E. Z. (1983). The intuitive personologist revisited: A critique of dialectical person perception. Journal of Personality, 51, 236–258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1983.tb00865.x
    Wundt, W. (1912). Elemente der Völkerpsychologie [Elements of a cultural psychology]. Leipzig: Alfred Kröner Verlag.
    Wundt, W. (1913). Die Psychologie im Kampf ums Dasein [Psychology's struggle for existence]. Leipzig: Kröner.

    Author Index

    About the Author

    James T. Lamiell is Professor of Psychology at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C. Born and raised with his eight sisters in Canton, Ohio, he earned a Bachelor of Liberal Studies degree at Bowling Green State University in 1972, concentrating in psychology and philosophy. He pursued his graduate studies in psychology at Kansas State University, earning his M.S. degree in 1974 and his Ph.D. in 1976. After 6 years at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, he joined the Georgetown faculty in 1982. A two-time Fulbright Senior Scholar to Germany, Lamiell has held guest professorships at the University of Heidelberg (1990) and at the University of Leipzig (1998).

    Lamiell is the author of The Psychology Of Personality: An Epistemological Inquiry (Columbia University Press, 1987) and translator of Clara and William Stern's 1909 monograph, Erinnerung, Aussage und Lüge in der ersten Kindheit, published in English as Recollection, Testimony, and Lying in Early Childhood (American Psychological Association Books, 1999). His numerous scholarly publications have primarily to do with theoretical and philosophical issues in the psychology of personality, and he has lectured on these topics at many universities both in the United States and in Europe.

    Lamiell has served as Associate Editor of the Journal of Personality and the Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology. He was elected Fellow of APA Division 1 (General Psychology) in 1987, and Division 24 (Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology) in 1988. He was the honored recipient of the Psi Chi Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching at the University of Illinois in 1979, and of the Edward B. Bunn Award for Faculty Excellence at Georgetown University in 2001.

    In his spare time, Lamiell enjoys picking bluegrass banjo and long-distance bicycle touring. He lives in Oakton, Virginia, with Leslie, his wife of 30 years. Together they have raised a son, Kevin (26), and a daughter, Erika (24).


    • Loading...
Back to Top

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website