Imagine the Feeling: An Aesthetic Science of Psychology.

We claim that static trait models have dominated contemporary personality psychology but fail to reflect adequately the persons they depict. Beginning from, but moving well beyond, this critique of the five factor model (and the personality psychology field over which it reigns), we shine an aesthetic and critical light on psychology's wider failings. We review the linguistic and methodological features that have undermined the discipline's faithful understandings of human beings and their experience.

Teaching about mental health and illness through the history of the DSM.

Most students enter introductory or abnormal psychology courses with a naively realist concept of what constitutes mental illness, and most textbooks do little to complicate this understanding. The tendency to reify the various diagnostic categories of the mental health disciplines into stable and independent illnesses is ever present. However, a critical review of the development of successive versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) can help instructors demonstrate the evolving ways in which mental health and illness are conceptualized and can reveal the cultural, political, and economic forces that shape this process.

Uncertainty as a fundamental scientific value.

The author argues that, though social scientists generally value tolerance for ambiguity, and some even assert a fundamental indeterminacy in human systems, there is still a discipline-wide discomfort with uncertainty and ambiguity. It is argued that this distaste for uncertainty derives from a distorted view of the classical physical sciences, a view that ignores the essentially critical and radical foundations of scientific practice. The drive for certainty, it is argued, is essentially unscientific, in that certain, or adequate, forms of knowledge can only recapitulate the already known and in their dogmatic and institutionalized forms prevent the development of genuinely new knowledge.

What is in a name? Understanding the implications of participant terminology.

The authors discuss the history of research terminology in American psychology with respect to the various labels given to those upon whom we conduct research ("observer"-"subject"-"participant"-"client"). This history is supplemented with an analysis of participant terminology in APA manuals from four historical eras, from the 1950s to the present. The general trend in participant terminology reflects the overall trends in American psychology, beginning with a complex lexicon that admitted both the passive and the active research participant, followed by a dominance of the passive term 'subject' and ending with the terminological ambiguity and multiplicity reflected in contemporary psychology.