My first degree was in Psychology. More importantly, it was in an unusually interdisciplinary department of a university that still had some traces left of a politically radical past, in the late 90s. As a result, one of the component courses was “Soviet Psychology” which introduced us to some key concepts in psychology that were either unique to the Soviet literature or had been developed much earlier there than on our side of the Iron Curtain. Some of the positive examples are:
- Learning as a culturally mediated process
- Child development as a process of learning to build more sophisticated relationships with a larger number of people
- Framing simple tools like a mathematician’s pad of paper as an extension of the mind
- A sophisticated critique of the artificiality of lab psychology experiments
Much of that seems pointlessly obvious now, but not all of it was yet in ~1998 and we looked at evidence that Soviet writers came up with these ideas decades before they were taken seriously anywhere in the West. We also looked at negative examples which clearly illustrated theory leading conclusions or promising lines of research being blocked because they might not fit official dogma.
Most interesting of all, we spent some time discussing why there would have been this divergence between the science of the same subject matter developing in different ideological climates. Obviously part of the answer was simply that limited communication across the Iron Curtain forked the literature, but it was also clearly not arbitrary which ideas advanced further on which side, so this was our introduction to:
- Explicit attempts to create an ideological science (the only factor that seems to have been exclusively Soviet)
- Explicit censorship, defunding or worse of ideologically challenging research programmes (not only in the USSR – see also McCarthyism)
- Implicit censorship by chilling effects, whereby scientists seem to prefigure a “dangerous” idea but conspicuously fail to explore it any further
- Subtler government guidance of subject matter by funding some types of research but not others
- The cultural milieu making people more likely to interpret data one way or another
- The media (academic and lay press) selectively amplifying those findings that fit the zeitgeist
It was a very powerful counter to the idealistic notion of science as a “value-free” enterprise which simply gets at Objective Truths.
Lately I’ve found myself coming back to this subject matter often. It’s come up in a few different conversations, and I’ve been trying to find a good overview of the subject, which I’ve not yet encountered. There are academic books looking in some detail at specific subfields (developmental psychology seems to be the best explored), there are good broad critiques of the “value-free science” mirage, and I just found an interesting history of Soviet Psychology from a specifically ideological point of view, but I’m looking for something else. I want to be able to point people to a case study that contrasts the Soviet and Western treatments of 2 or 3 topics through the 20th Century, covering the restrictions and missed opportunities on both sides, as a cautionary tale about the inevitable intrusion of values into science. I want something that’s readable in one sitting by people not steeped in the canons of either psychology or Marxism, with the sort of extensive references that would be useful to people who are.
If no such thing exists, I want to write it. But turning things I learned as an undergrad 15 years ago into a really useful guide today will entail a lot of work. I won’t be able to do a worthwhile job of this without digging up and reading a lot of primary sources that I only vaguely remember. If it’s either been done already or is interesting to fewer people than I think, it’s not worth the time. So I have three questions for anyone who’s stayed with me this far:
- Does such a guide already exist? If it does, please send me a link and save me a lot of work!
- If it doesn’t and I were to write it, would you be interested enough to read it?
- If this is a subject you have deep knowledge of, can you help me? Anything from sending me a reading list to coauthoring the piece would be very welcome.
@eldang Hm. I would like to see such a thing. But my extent of Soviet psych investigation ends at Vygotsky.
@eldang Since I basically have the research profile of Alan Kay + Terry Winograd.
@BrianTRice hah. That makes you sound very interesting. Followed!
This sounds super fascinating. Do it do it do it! RT @eldang should I go down this Soviet Psychology rabbit hole? http://t.co/P3EPciPXzz
@eldang Reminds me I should finish reading A Social History of Truth – started 5 years ago and drifted off partway through.
@eldang Follow-up question: is this something I could crowdfund or get published? It’ll happen a lot quicker if not competing w/ paid work.
@eldang Follow-up to that: does crowdfunding change the resources part of the cultural bias equation at all?
@eldang do you know of a lot of research that gets crowdfunded?
@eldang was asking re:the 2nd follow-up. i’m sure crowdfunding will work. i’m sure you could find a publisher. everyone likes soviet science
@eldang :D
*I* would totally read this book. I don’t have much to offer in the way towards helping write or research it, but these insights do seem to have a lot of relevance to the “Lean Startup” data-driven-enterprise fetish in the software world.
I *was* envisaging something much shorter than a book, though each time I discuss the idea with another person I think of more things that should go in it so… maybe I’ve bitten off more than I thought….
I appreciate the feedback, and if I do embark on this I probably will want to bounce ideas off you as I go along. Both your startup experience and your intimate knowledge of a separate but related area of academia seem relevant.
I think there’s a book, or at least a blog-post series here. Wondering if maybe a LeanPub (https://leanpub.com/) model might make sense as a crowdfunder – people like me can provide feedback on working drafts in early days, too.
Ooh, thank you for that pointer. That sounds like a platform that would work a lot better in an incremental fashion than something like kickstarter would, which would be very useful in this context. If I try to raise money now for a book on this subject, the obvious question is “why are you the person qualified to write it?” and I don’t have a good enough answer. But if I can write an introduction and then let each stage establish credibility for and raise money for the next… that feels a lot more attainable.
In case you were wondering, this is what happens when I give @eldang homework. http://t.co/XhatrObKZQ You’re welcome, internet.
@eldang The way you’ve presented this, I also want you to tie it back to politicized science right now, especially vis a vis climate change.
@nein09 @eldang Bet you $1 the parallels will be sufficiently obvious to the reader that an explicit call-out would be overly anvillicious.
@mcmoots @eldang true dat
@nein09 @mcmoots @eldang You can make a separate anvillicious version, or encourage one elsewhere. [this is my new favorite word, thank you]
@eldang I would totally dig this. How long-form are you thinking? I feel like there might be a book in this project.
@eldang aspects of sov psych (eg ZPD) still popular in educational teaching in HE in UK. can send u paper I did on VR & tchg if u like?
@eldang fascinating! i’m not a psychologist, but i would read this, and i’m sure i’m not the only one (: