| In order to empirically assess the boundaries between community psychology and community mental health, a content analysis was conducted on articles appearing in the principal journals of the fields. All articles published between 1973 and 1980 in the American Journal of Community Psychology, the Journal of Community Psychology, and the Community Mental Health Journal were sampled. In addition, samples of 55% and 83% of the articles in the two community psychology journals and the Community Mental Health Journal were analyzed for 1981 and 1982, respectively. Articles were analyzed for author characteristics, topic areas, purpose served, unit of analysis, subject characteristics, dependent measures, and citations. Results indicate that while the two fields have many commonalities, they have generally developed distinct identities, and are moving apart over time on most variables. Community psychology has increasingly come to reflect its ideology by initiating interventions at earlier points in time and orienting these interventions toward competency enhancement. In contrast, community mental health typically directs interventions at remediating deficits or problems. Community psychology has failed to conform to its ideology pertaining to ecological level of intervention. As is the case in community mental health, the field of community psychology has overwhelmingly emphasized individual levels as opposed to group, community, or systems-level interventions. The pursuits of community mental health primarily reflect federal mandates and financial concerns, and are oriented toward mental health issues and patient populations. In contrast, the predominately university base of community psychology has contributed to its ability to develop research methodologies and evaluate interventions oriented toward the general well-being of community members. Differences and trends over time are discussed and implications are drawn for the future of community psychology. |
