Advertisement

An Intersectionality for Theoretical Psychology?

  • Kathleen L. SlaneyEmail author
Chapter
  • 115 Downloads
Part of the Palgrave Studies in the Theory and History of Psychology book series (PSTHP)

Abstract

Theoretical psychology encompasses numerous topics and scholarly traditions and forms of scholarship, including (but not limited to) narrative and hermeneutic methods, positioning theory, historical ontology, historiometry, conceptual and discourse analysis, philosophical hermeneutics, philosophical anthropology, phenomenology, empirical philosophy, critical studies, feminist studies, social action theory, science and technology studies, and various lenses through which inquiries of specific psychological categories of experience may be viewed (e.g., contemporary psychoanalysis, Aristotelian ethics, existentialism). As a result, not only can it be difficult to know where theoretical psychology “fits” within the larger discipline, it is not always clear how the different topics and scholarly traditions within theoretical psychology interact and inform one another to form a coherent subdiscipline. Add to this the fact that theoretical psychology, like the larger discipline of psychology, is constantly being recreated as specific issues come into and go out of focus and new methods of inquiry become available, and it is indeed quite a challenge for theoretical psychologists to identify the boundaries of their subdiscipline. Furthermore, it is not altogether clear whether and how different inquires and modes of inquiry can be brought together under a unified agenda, or of whether, in fact, such an agenda is useful, or even desirable. In my contribution to this volume, I borrow the concept of intersectionality from critical race and feminist theory to explore ideas concerning how theoretical psychology might be re-envisioned, re-thought, and re-invigorated in light of the multiplicity of interdependent (?) concerns and approaches adopted by theoretical psychologists.

References

  1. Ashmore, M. (1989). The reflexivity thesis: Wrighting sociology of scientific knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Beal, F. M. (1970). Double jeopardy: To be black and female. In T. Cade (Ed.), The black woman: An anthology (pp. 90–100). New York: Signet.Google Scholar
  3. Bruni, F. (2017, August 12). I’m a white man. Hear me out. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com
  4. Burman, E. (2003). From difference to intersectionality: Challenges and resources. European Journal of Psychotherapy, Counselling and Health, 6(4), 293–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carastathis, A. (2016). Intersectionality: Origins, contestations, horizons. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Choo, H. Y., & Ferree, M. M. (2010). Practicing intersectionality in sociological research: A critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities. Sociological Theory, 28, 129–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cole, E. R. (2008). Coalitions as a model for intersectionality: From theory to practice. Sex Roles, 59, 443–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cole, E. R. (2009). Intersectionality and research in psychology. American Psychologist, 64(3), 170–180.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Collins, P. H. (2000). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Collins, P. H., & Bilge, S. (2016). Intersectionality. Polity Press.Google Scholar
  11. Collins, P. H., & Chepp, V. (2013). Intersectionality. In G. Waylen, K. Celis, J. Kantola, & S. L. Weldon (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of gender and politics (pp. 57–87). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Crenshaw, K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. The University of Chicago Legal Forum, 140, 139–167.Google Scholar
  13. Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crenshaw, K. W. (2003). Traffic at the crossroads: Multiple oppressions. In R. Morgan (Ed.), Sisterhood is forever: The women’s anthology for a new millennium (pp. 43–57). New York: Washington Square Press.Google Scholar
  15. Dhamoon, R. K. (2011). Considerations on mainstreaming intersectionality. Political Research Quarterly, 64, 230–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Easteal, P. L. (2002). Looking through the prevailing kaleidoscope: Women victims of violence and intersectionality. Sister in Law, A Feminist Law Review, 6, 48–77.Google Scholar
  17. Else-Quest, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2016a). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research I: Theoretical and epistemological issues. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 155–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Else-Quest, N. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2016b). Intersectionality in quantitative psychological research II: Methods and techniques. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40, 319–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Evans, E. (2015). The politics of third wave feminisms: Neoliberalism, intersectionality, and the state in Britain and the US. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gemignani, M. (2017). Toward a critical reflexivity in qualitative inquiry: Relational and posthumanist reflections on realism, researcher’s centrality, and representationalism in reflexivity. Qualitative Psychology, 4, 185–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hancock, A.-M. (2007). When multiplication doesn’t equal quick addition: Examining intersectionality as a research paradigm. Perspectives on Politics, 5, 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hankivsky, O. (2014). Intersectionality 101. Burnaby, BC: Institute for Intersectionality Research and Policy, Simon Fraser University. Retrieved January 16, 2018, from http://vawforum-cwr.ca/sites/default/files/attachments/intersectionallity_101.pdf
  23. Hira, S. (2016). A decolonial critique of intersectionality. Retrieved December 22, 2017, from https://www.din.today/a-decolonial-critique-of-intersectionality/
  24. Jordan-Zachery, J. S. (2007). Am I a black woman or a woman who is black? A few thoughts on the meaning of intersectionality. Politics & Gender, 3, 254–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. King, D. K. (1988). Multiple jeopardy, multiple consciousness: The context of a black feminist ideology. Signs, 14, 42–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kirschner, S. R. (2006). Psychology and pluralism: Toward the psychological studies. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 26, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lindworsky, J. (1932). Theoretical psychology (H. R. DeSilva, Trans.). St. Louis, MO: Herder Book Co.Google Scholar
  28. Lutz, H. (2014). Intersectionality’s (brilliant) career—How to understand the attraction of the concept. Working paper. Retrieved December 18, 2017, from http://www.fb03.uni-frankfurt.de/51634119/Lutz_WP.pdf
  29. Maiers, W. (2001). Psychological theorizing in transdisciplinary perspective. In J. R. Morss, N. Stephenson, & H. van Rappard (Eds.), Theoretical issues in psychology: Proceedings of the International Society for Theoretical Psychology 1999 conference (pp. 275–288). Springer Science+Business Media.Google Scholar
  30. May, V. M. (2015). Pursuing intersectionality, unsettling dominant imaginaries. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30, 1771–1800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Morawski, J. (2005). Reflexivity and the psychologists. History of the Human Sciences, 18(4), 77–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Morawski, J. (2014). Reflexivity. In T. Teo (Ed.), Encyclopedia of critical psychology: Springer reference (pp. 1653–1660). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nash, J. C. (2008). Re-thinking intersectionality. Feminist Review, 89, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Osbeck, L. M. (1993). Social constructionism and the pragmatic standard. Theory & Psychology, 3, 337–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Osbeck, L. M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2014). Situated distributed cognition. Philosophical Psychology, 27, 82–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Phoenix, A., & Pattynama, P. (2006). Intersectionality. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13, 187–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rutherford, A., Sheese, K., & Ruck, N. (2015). Feminism and theoretical psychology. In J. Martin, J. Sugarman, & K. Slaney (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of theoretical psychology: Methods, approaches, and new directions for social sciences (pp. 374–391). Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  39. Shields, S. A. (2008). Gender: An intersectionality perspective. Sex Roles, 59, 301–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Slaney, K. L. (2015). “I’m not that kind of psychologist”: A case for methodological pragmatism in theoretical inquiries into psychological science practices. In J. Martin, J. Sugarman, & K. L. Slaney (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of theoretical and philosophical psychology: Methods, approaches, and new directions for social sciences (pp. 343–358). Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  41. Slife, B. D., & Williams, R. (1997). Toward a theoretical psychology: Should a subdiscipline be formally recognized? American Psychologist, 52, 117–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stenner, P. (2014). Transdisciplinarity. In T. Teo (Ed.), Encyclopedia of critical psychology: Springer reference (pp. 1987–1993). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Stenner, P. (2015). A transdisciplinary psychosocial approach. In J. Martin, J. Sugarman, & K. Slaney (Eds.), The Wiley handbook of theoretical psychology: Methods, approaches, and new directions for social sciences (pp. 308–324). Chichester, UK: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
  44. Syed, M. (2010). Disciplinarity and methodology in intersectionality theory and research. American Psychologist, 65, 61–62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Teo, T. (2008). From speculation to epistemological violence in psychology. Theory & Psychology, 18, 47–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Teo, T. (2010). What is epistemological violence in the empirical social sciences. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(5), 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Teo, T. (2015). Critical psychology: A geography of intellectual engagement and resistance. American Psychologist, 70, 243–254.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. Treloar, R. (2014). Intersectionality. In T. Teo (Ed.), Encyclopedia of critical psychology: Springer reference (pp. 995–1001). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Warner, L. R. (2008). A best practices guide to intersectional approaches in psychological research. Sex Roles, 59, 454–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Warner, L. R., Settles, I. H., & Shields, S. A. (2018). Intersectionality theory in the psychology of women. In C. B. Travis, J. White, A. Rutherford, W. S. Williams, S. L. Cook, & K. F. Wyche (Eds.), APA handbook of psychology of women: History, theory, and backgrounds. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  51. Warner, L. R., & Shields, S. A. (2013). The intersections of sexuality, gender, and race: Identity research at the crossroads. Sex Roles, 68, 803–810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Warnke, G. (2003). Hermeneutics and constructed identities. In L. Code (Ed.), Feminist interpretations of Hans-Georg Gadamer. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Warnke, G. (2007). After identity: Rethinking race, sex, and gender. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  54. Warnke, G. (2011). Debating sex and gender. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Wertz, F. J. (1999). Multiple methods in psychology: Epistemological grounding and the possibility of unity. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 19, 131–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Simon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations