Relevance to Psychology of Beliefs About Socialism: Some New Research Questions

37 Pages·2016·0.26 MB·English

by  Bernice Lott

UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff RRhhooddee IIssllaanndd
DDiiggiittaallCCoommmmoonnss@@UURRII
Psychology Faculty Publications Psychology
2015
RReelleevvaannccee ttoo PPssyycchhoollooggyy ooff BBeelliieeffss AAbboouutt SSoocciiaalliissmm:: SSoommee NNeeww
RReesseeaarrcchh QQuueessttiioonnss
Bernice Lott
University of Rhode Island, [email protected]
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/psy_facpubs
TThhee UUnniivveerrssiittyy ooff RRhhooddee IIssllaanndd FFaaccuullttyy hhaavvee mmaaddee tthhiiss aarrttiiccllee ooppeennllyy aavvaaiillaabbllee..
PPlleeaassee lleett uuss kknnooww hhooww OOppeenn AAcccceessss ttoo tthhiiss rreesseeaarrcchh bbeenneefifittss yyoouu..
This is a pre-publication author manuscript of the final, published article.
Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable towards Open Access
Policy Articles, as set forth in our Terms of Use.
CCiittaattiioonn//PPuubblliisshheerr AAttttrriibbuuttiioonn
Lott, B. (2016), Relevance to Psychology of Beliefs about Socialism: Some New Research Questions.
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 16: 261-277. doi: 10.1111/asap.12092
Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/asap.12092
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Psychology at DigitalCommons@URI. It has been
accepted for inclusion in Psychology Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI.
For more information, please contact [email protected].
1

Running head: PSYCHOLOGY AND SOCIALISM

Relevance to Psychology of Beliefs About Socialism:
Some New Research Questions
Bernice Lott
University of Rhode Island

Author Note
Correspondence should be addressed to Bernice Lott, Ph.D., Psychology
Department, Chafee Building, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881,
(email) [email protected]. (FAX) 401-874-2157

I am grateful to Heather Bullock for very helpful feedback.
2

Abstract
This paper aims to stimulate discussion about the potential relevance of the
concept of socialism for what we study and the questions we ask. The economic
systems of capitalism and socialism are seldom considered subjects of interest in
psychology. At this particular time, however, especially in the United States, the
relevance of these systems for our theories and research on human behavior,
health, and human welfare seem particularly relevant and potentially significant. I
argue that discussions of socialism should be helpful in expanding the context of
our concerns in psychology and the identification of important new variables. The
growing crisis of inequality in the U.S. is the major impetus for this argument.

Keywords: socialism, capitalism, social justice, social change, inequality
3

Relevance to Psychology of Beliefs About Socialism:
Some New Research Questions
My objective in this paper is to stimulate discussion about the relevance of
the concept of socialism to what we psychologists study and the questions we
ask. The “S” word is rarely considered a subject of interest in our discipline but, at
this particular historical period in the United States, its potential contribution to
the enrichment of our theories and research on human behavior, health, and
wellbeing seems worth our careful attention. Such discussion may help us
expand the context of our concerns and identify important new variables. Thus,
this paper attempts to challenge the tacit acceptance of presentations in
“mainstream media”, and elsewhere, of socialism as “frightening, foreign,
unpatriotic, and menacing” (Goldin, Smith, & Smith, 2014, p. xi).
Like most other institutions and endeavors, psychology appears to take for
granted that our current capitalist system is the best economic system thus far
developed, and that its excesses can be curbed or corrected by regulations and
ameliorative social policies. Our concern, as psychologists, however, is precisely
with those consequences of the system that have immediate and long-term
effects on human behavior and the health and welfare of individuals, families,
and communities – the focus of our research and practice. In the context of this
analysis, capitalism signifies the current status quo, especially in the United
States, while the concept of socialism is suggestive of socioeconomic changes in
the direction of greater cooperative and public control of production and
4

resources. Beliefs and attitudes toward capitalism and socialism influence the
personal and social lives of people, the maintenance of our social institutions,
and efforts in the direction of social change.
The immediate impetus for this paper’s questions and research
suggestions is the evidence, coming from multiple reliable sources and
indicators, that economic inequality is rampant and extreme. While inequality is
not new in modern history, and has been a periodic phenomenon since the start
of the industrial revolution (Piketty, 2014), it has become increasingly prominent
and problematic in the United States. Research continues to document that the
multiple consequences of economic and social inequality seriously jeopardize the
health and wellbeing of persons, families, and communities. Fine (2012),
referring to our current period as one of “massive inequality and sustained
oppression” (p. 416), judges this to be of significant concern to psychologists. Is
there, within our discipline, serious questioning of our economic system? Should
we be studying and critiquing its role in the production of inequality, as we
document the negative effects of such a state of affairs for human welfare?
Some critical psychologists, such as Teo (2009, p. 49), assert that our
discipline has played “a role in maintaining capitalism”, as well as patriarchy and
colonialism. He argues that mainstream psychology “reinforces the status quo”
which is “in the interest of the powerful.” Parker (2007) posits that psychology
serves capitalism by individualizing political phenomena, proposing false
explanations of behavior, and pathologizing dissenters and anti-capitalist
5

activism. Consideration of alternatives to a market economy, and what that might
mean for individual and community health and welfare, is certainly rare in
psychology. Joravsky (2000) notes that the significance of Marxist views for
psychology is seldom discussed in Western forums. Thus, for example, in a very
relevant book titled “The High Price of Materialism” (Kasser, 2002), there is no
citation for socialism in the index.
There are exceptions to the normative lack of interest by U.S.
psychologists in alternative economic and political structures. Arfken (2013), in
discussing social justice, asks us to recognize its relationship to equality, which,
he argues, “can only become a reality when the structures and institutions that
separate the rich from the poor lose their force” (p. 475). This, he argues further,
is unlikely to occur in a market economy since capitalism is geared toward the
accumulation of resources by the few who control the means of production.
Another exception to the lack of interest in socialism is found in concerns raised
by some in the Skinnerian behavior analysis community. Rakos (1989) raises
questions about the extent to which socialism and capitalism are “compatible with
the principles governing human behavior “ (p. 23). His analysis compares the
potency of moral incentives, presented by socialism, with the material incentives
present in capitalism, as controlling stimuli in the “maintenance of productive
work and social behavior” (p. 25).
Other notable efforts to consider the relevance of economic systems for
psychology are those by Martin-Baro (1996) in his proposals for a liberation
6

psychology, and the more recent analytical contributions of critical psychology
(Fox, Prilleltensky, & Austin, 2009; Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002). Fundamental
to critical theory analyses are inquiries about the role of social structures and
processes in maintaining inequities, as well as a commitment to studying
strategies for change (McDowell & Fang, 2007). Critical psychologists focus
specifically on issues of social justice, human welfare, context, and diversity.
They challenge accepted propositions and interpretations of behavioral
phenomena, and examine the political and social implications of psychological
research, theories, and practice. Central to this agenda is the recognition that
“power and interests affect our human experience” (Prilleltensky & Nelson, 2002,
p. 5). This stands in contrast to the more usual focus in mainstream psychology
on individuals as separate from their economic and socio-political contexts. The
final section of this paper presents recommendations for new research directions
informed by such arguments.
Economic Inequality
Many readers are familiar with much of the relevant data, but they provide
a necessary context for the arguments that follow. Documentation of the current
inequality crisis in the United States is prevalent in our media and journals. Yet,
as the situation becomes increasingly bleak, we may need to keep re-examining
and re-emphasizing the drastic effects of inequality on middle-class and low-
income persons and families, and to suggest new questions and research
directions.
7

International data (cf., Leonhardt & Quealy, 2014) indicate that middle-
class incomes are now higher in Canada than in the U.S., and that the poor in
much of Europe earn more than the poor in the U.S. At the 20th percentile of
income distribution, families in Canada and the Scandinavian countries make
significantly more than U.S. families. The U.S. has fallen behind not only in
income but also in literacy and numerical skills - younger persons (between 16
and 24) rank close to the bottom among rich countries. Similar data come from
an international study of “livability” within 132 countries that show the U.S. in 16th
place (cf. Kristof, 2014). The U.S. ranks 70th in health, 39th in basic education,
and 31st in personal safety. In contrast, when increase in the percentage of
income within the richest one percent is examined, the U.S. ranks first (Kripke,
2014).
A comparison of two neighborhoods in Baltimore, Maryland illustrates
these statistics and what they mean for family health and welfare. In the affluent
neighborhood of Greater Roland Park, where the median annual household
income is $90,000, life expectancy is 83 years; a few miles away in Upton/Druid
Heights, where the median income is $13,000, life expectancy is 63 years (DC by
the Numbers, 2013).
In the United States, poverty is currently 15 percent nationally, and 22
percent for children. While the poor can buy a variety of inexpensive “stuff” at
bargain and discount prices, they cannot afford many of the crucial services
required to get out of poverty, such as child care and education (Lowrey, 2014).
8

It has become increasingly difficult for families to move out of poverty and for
workers to leave low-wage jobs, despite the fact that, among such workers, 41
percent have had some college (Greenhouse, 2014). The average age of
workers earning the minimum wage is 35, with one-third older than 40; 27
percent are parents (Bernstein, 2014).
Wages and benefits for most U. S. workers have been generally shrinking,
resulting in people “working harder than ever, but still getting nowhere” (Reich,
2013). In reflecting upon this state of affairs, Blow (2014), like others, concludes:
“Imbalance is built into a capitalist economy.” Thus, in 2012 the top one percent
in the U.S. “took home 22 percent of the nation’s income; the top 0.1 percent, 11
percent” (Stiglitz, 2013). Stiglitz attributes the upswing in U.S. inequality to
policies that decrease taxes for the rich and reduce financial sector regulations,
and to underinvestment in health, education, and infrastructure. Others include,
among the chief causes of today’s high level of inequality, the decline of unions
with the consequent effect of “declining bargaining power of the American
worker” (Carpenter, 2014, p. 23).
A recurrent problem is unemployment. This produces stresses and
hardships in the form of loss of income but additionally, and significantly, is the
associated loss of access to benefits and reductions in positive feelings about
oneself. Belle and Bullock (2011) have summarized the major issues
unemployment raises for psychologists and report the most recent relevant
empirical findings. Unemployment, they note, is most likely to occur among low-
9

wage workers and persons of color, who also have fewer resources to help
mitigate the loss of a job. “Job loss”, they conclude (p. 2) ”is associated with
elevated rates of mental and physical health problems, increases in mortality
rates…detrimental changes in family relationships… [and] low subjective well-
being.” Persons unemployed for more than six months – the long-term
unemployed - experience a serious reduction in the number of interviews they
are offered, with some employers explicitly indicating in job postings that
unemployed applicants need not apply (cf. Downing, 2014). In addition to loss of
status and loss of income, job loss also means loss of benefits, prime among
them being employer-offered health insurance.
The consequences of inequality, supported by empirical research, are
remarkably wide, varied, and multi-faceted. Data from many countries strongly
support the conclusion that materialistic values are associated with low wellbeing
(Kasser, 2002). Bezrucha (2014, p. 4) notes that, “the factor most responsible
for the relatively poor health in the United States is the vast and rising inequality
in wealth and income that we not only tolerate, but resist changing.” He cites a
2013 U.S. Institute of Medicine report that links economic inequality to social
disadvantages in diverse areas of life including infant mortality and insufficient
support for parenting. With regard to education, in the United States “whether a
student graduates [from college] or not seems to depend almost entirely on just
one factor – how much money his or her parents make” (Tough, 2014, p. 28).
Ability, as indicated by standardized test scores, is far less related to this