Allisonsmasters

My blogs on how psychology has developed over the years

recent posts

about

  • Blog 3: Mid-to-late 20th century (1950s – 1980s)

    How developments in psychological research in the mid-to-late twentieth century gave new opportunities for professional practice with clients?

    Let’s start answering this question by looking at an area of professional practice which is prevalent today: Counselling and Psychotherapy. The British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy (2025) conducted a survey of 5000 UK adults to find out about their experiences and attitudes to therapy and mental health. They found that:

    • 35% had had counselling at some point in their life.
    • Nearly half were referred by a GP.
    • One in ten had been referred by their employer.

    What has led to this?

    In the early-mid twentieth century, this picture would be quite different. Clinical psychologists might have found themselves relegated to carrying out psychological testing. The medical profession and psychiatrists led the way. Post World War Two, the work of psychologists changed (Benjamin,2024). Psychologists were developing techniques and theories that were increasingly used to research and treat clients.

    Development of the Person-Centred Approach

    One of those psychologists developing new theories and approaches was Carl Rogers. In the 1940s, he developed the non-directive, client-centred approach to counselling and psychotherapy. (Kirschenbaum and Jourdan, 2005).

    Rogers developed the theory that the client can understand the aspects of their life that causes their mental challenges, even if it is a latent awareness. They have the capacity within them to change. The role of the therapist is to create the psychological atmosphere that facilitates this happening. He suggested that there are three core conditions needed. The first is unconditional positive regard, second is empathy and third is congruence (Miller and Moyers, 2017).

    Rogers and his colleagues shared their principles through writings and work with clients. They also carried out empirical research (Miller and Moyers, 2017). Rogers and his team measured key variables including the therapist’s acceptance, empathy, and congruence. His work was so well-regarded that in 1957, he received the Distinguished Scientific Contribution award (Kirschenbaum and Jourdan, 2005).

    Rogers continued to develop their client centred approach over the next 25 years in diverse fields. These included fields like education, leadership, relationships like marriage and even conflict resolution.

    Has this approach provided new opportunities?

    Kirschenbaum and Jourdan (2005) found that there were more publications on Rogers and the person-centred approach in the 17 years after his death than in the 40 years before. They found that research studies have continued to support Rogers’s theories and client centred principles still form the basis of practices by therapists today.

    New techniques have been developed to further client self-discovery whilst still having person-centred principles underpinning them. Miller and Moyers (2017) showed the impact of motivational interviewing which has evolved from client centred therapy. Other offshoots include child-centred play therapy, focusing, expressive therapy.

    Shefer et al (2018) focused on Rogers’s work on regardful relationships to look at how that can influence employee performance.

    These are just a few examples of how Carl Rogers’s and his colleagues work continue to influence the work of researchers and practitioners today. Their research still provides today’s psychologists with a basis for new ways to work with clients.

    We also shouldn’t forget where this blog started. Person-centred therapies developed in the mid-20th century are widely acknowledged as a key technique used today in the UK. I’m sure Carl Rogers would be delighted.

    References

    Association for the development of the Person-Centred Approach 2025 (n.d.) https://adpca.org/the-history-of-the-pca/

    Benjamin Jr., L.T. (2024). A Brief History of Modern Psychology. (4th ed.). Wiley.

    British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy 2025 (n.d.) https://www.bacp.co.uk/about-us/about-bacp/bacp-public-perceptions-survey/

    Kirschenbaum, H. & Jourdan, A. (2005). The current status of Carl Rogers and the person-centred approach. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 42 (1), pp 37 – 51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.42.1.37

    Jafari, M.R.D., Aghaei, A. & Rad, M.R., (2020). Existential humanistic therapy with couples and its effect on meaning of life and love attitudes. The American journal of Family Therapy, 48 (5), pp530-545. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2020.1770142

    Miller, W.R. & Moyers, T.B., (2017). Motivational Interviewing and the Clinical Science of Carl Rogers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 85 (8), pp757-766. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000179

    Renger, S. & Macaskill, A. (2021). Developing the foundations for a learning-based humanistic therapy. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 65 (5). https://doi.org/10.1177/00221678211007668

    Shefer, N., Carmeli, A. & Cohen-Meitar, R. (2018). Bringing carl Rogers back in: Exploring the power of positive regard at work. British Journal of management, 29, pp 63 -81. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12247

  • Gestalt psychology – its decline as a stand-alone school of thought.

    You ever wondered why when you’re in a museum and see something hanging on the wall, you know that the frame, glass, diagrams make up a picture? As humans, our brains will automatically organise what we see around us. This is, at a very rudimentary level, the basis of Gestalt psychology.

    According to Benjamin (2024), “Gestalt psychology is best known for the phrase, the whole is different from the sum of the parts.”  In other words, we instinctively group and interpret information to help us experience the whole, rather than just focus on the details.

    The Rise of Gestalt Psychology.

    A group of German psychologists are attributed with its development (Benjamin, 2024). Its founding is attributed to Max Wertheimer in the 1910’s. He was later joined by Kurt Koffka and Wolfgang Kohler (Rock & Palmer, 1990). It is suggested that Gestalt psychology was part of a resistance movement within German society to the alternative psychological theories of the time particularly Structuralism (Pickren & Rutherford, 2010). Whether it’s appropriate to class it as a resistance movement, the schools of thought have distinct views of how best to analyse and interpret human behaviours. Alternatives advocate that human beings are a sum of their parts, these parts can be identified and the causes of behaviour related to individual external stimuli. They aim to break down consciousness into its basic components such as sensations, images and feelings and study these (Burnes & Cooke, 2013).

    Gestalt psychologists advocated that the human mind does not see things in different bits but rather perceives wholes. By looking at individual elements separately from each other and not including the person’s perception of their environment, they concluded that this would give you a misleading view of the causes of human behaviour. (Burnes & Cooke, 2013).

    Interesting principles were developed that are still used today, including:

    Proximity – even if objects don’t look the same, if they’re close together we tend to group them.

    Similarity – we naturally group objects together that look alike.

    Continuity – we tend to prefer continuous smooth patterns.

    Closure – if something isn’t whole, our brains fill the gaps.

    Why did it decline?

    Gestalt had become a leading school of thought in Germany in the 20’s and 30’s. When the Nazis came to power, their ability to carry out their work freely was inhibited. By the mid 1930’s, the Nazi’s tyranny forced each of the leading gestalt psychologists to escape to America. It was not easy to start again in a different country, and their influence was lessened (Benjamin, 2024).

    Many psychologists were not convinced and remained committed to other schools of thought. Gestalt theory was felt to be poorly articulated and the research techniques were perceived to have minimal empirical validation (Wagner-Moore, 2004).

    Coupled with this, three of the leading gestalt psychologists had died by 1947. This limited the time they had to develop their theories further and influence others (Benjamin, 2024).

    Enduring Influence

    Despite its decline as a school of thought, many of the gestalt principles have been incorporated into other areas of psychology such as counselling with a focus on the here and now. Its influence can still be seen today outside of psychology in many diverse areas such as design and technology (Rock & Palmer, 1990).

    Given the relevance of many of their principles, it’s good to see that their influence is still around today.

    References

    Benjamin Jr., L.T. (2024). A Brief History of Modern Psychology. (4th ed.). Wiley.

    Burnes, B. & Cooke, B. (2013). Kurt Lewin’s Field Theory: A Review and Re-evaluation. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15, pp 408 – 425. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2012.00348.x

    Pickren, W.E. & Rutherford, A. (2010). A History of Modern Psychology. Wiley.

    Rock, I. & Palmer, S., (1990). The Legacy of Gestalt Psychology. Scientific American, 263 (6), pp 84-91. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/24997014

    Wagner-Moore, L.E. (2004). Gestalt Therapy: Past, Present, Theory and Research. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 41(2), pp 180 – 189. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-3204.41.2.180

    Allison Beattie – Masters student at Robert Gordon University.

  • How people from one under-represented background in psychology in early 20th century faced barriers, yet still contributed to psychology?

    Women were an under-represented group in psychology in the early 20th century.

    First some context, the world was experiencing rapid advancement. The light bulb, the telephone and who could forget, the iconic blue jeans had all been invented in the previous 30 years.  There were improvements in education, working conditions and more affordable travel. 

    Life was changing for women. Between 1880 and 1910, the number of women employed in the United States increased from 2.6m to 7.8m (although 60 percent of all working women were employed as domestic servants). The number of women enrolled in women’s colleges grew from 34,100 in 1910 to 82,100 in 1930 (Library of Congress 2025).

    Despite these advancements, women were still very much seen as the homemaker and often under-represented in scientific fields. However, evidence shows that psychology was amongst the most welcoming in admitting women to its ranks (Rossiter, 1982). Furumoto and Scarborough (1986) identified 25 women who had entered the field by 1906 in the USA.  This is significant as there were only 198 members of the American Psychological Association (APA) in 1904. This openness to women was replicated in the UK where by 1918, 16% of the members of the British Psychological Society (BPA) were women (Valentine 2017).  This was in stark contrast to other areas such as law and medicine where it would be many years before women were admitted to their ranks.

    So, were they under-represented? Yes, but I’d suggest it was as much under-represented in opportunities as numbers. These pioneering women faced barriers.

    a. Limited opportunities

    In the USA, psychology roles available to women were predominately at women only colleges. Often teaching roles rather than research roles. If a woman got married, she was expected to give up her career. 

         b.   Social and cultural

    As Valentine (2017) pointed out, women faced the challenge that they were expected to be the homemaker. If they didn’t marry, families would expect them to take responsibility for looking after elderly parents. As coined by Rossiter (1982), they faced either hierarchical (occupy less prestigious or senior positions) or territorial (focus on caring roles) segregation. Of the 16 women members of the BPA in this period, 11 never married. Why? In this period, you couldn’t have both.

    It’s inspirational to review examples of their achievements despite the challenges. They held multiple qualifications and roles in education over their careers including 2 APA presidents. Valentine (2017) noted that 60% of the British women academics were widely published and their research was not confined to caring topics. 

    Whilst there were a reasonable number of women psychologists, evidence suggests the opportunity for them to reach their full potential were more limited than men.

    One final thought, would these pioneers be happy with what has been achieved in 100 years?

    Today women account for approximately 75% of registered practitioner psychologists and over 80% of clinical psychologists today. Men are less likely than women to pursue a career in psychology, but those who do, tend to get paid more than their female counterparts and hold more senior roles. (Nuffield Trust 2021).

    The answer is most likely “maybe but still more work to do”.

    References

    Benjamin, L.T. Jr. (2024). A Brief History of Modern Psychology (4th ed.). John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

    Greenwood, J.D. (2015). A Conceptual History of Psychology, Exploring the Tangled Web. pp289 – 343. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107414914.010

    Library of Congress, 2025 (n.d.) https://www.loc.gov/classroom-materials/united-states-history-primary-source-timeline/progressive-era-to-new-era-1900-1929/womens-suffrage-in-progressive era

    Milar, K.S. (2000). The First Generation of Woman Psychologists and the Psychology of Women. AmericanPsychologist, 55(6), 616-619. https://doi.org/10.10371/0003-066X.55.6.616

    Palmer, W., Schlepper, L., Hemmings, N. & Crellin, N. (2021) The Right Track, Participation and Progression in Psychology Career Paths. Nuffield Trust. https://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/sites/default/files/2021-07/1625671007_nuffield-trust-the-right-track-pipeline-of-psychologists-web2.pdf

    Rossiter, M. (1982). Women Scientists in America: Struggles and strategies to 1940. Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Scarborough, E & Furumoto, L. (1987). Untold Lives: The First Generation of American Women Psychologists.Columbia University Press.

    Valentine, E. L. (2017). Early Women Members of the British Psychological Society. Stories of Psychology. British Psychological Society. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpSVtO_513s&list=PLCkLQOAPOtT0RG9391eKQFvEDrG3hJzYb&index=1

    Author: Allison Beattie , MSc Applied Psychology Student, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen.