| Since the founding of their subdiscipline, community psychologists have espoused the values of active participation by community members and professional accountability and, on the other hand, natural sciences rigor. But several authors have asserted that in actual practice community members have played a subordinate role and researchers a dominant one in the research relationship. However, community psychology has lacked systematic investigation of the historical role of human subjects in its research.;In Study 2, comparison of trends in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology for the years 1961-1963 and 1981-1983 showed that community psychologists have imitated the objectivistic report-writing conventions typical in mainstream psychology. But the question remained whether community psychologists actually practiced more cooperative research than their published reports suggest.;In Study 3, interviews of 22 community psychologists who have held key editorial and organizational positions confirmed that social historical factors markedly shaped incipient research practice and serve in fact to maintain subordinate status of community members. The informants' comments indicate that community psychology research has been a social product in conformity with the norms of more powerful psychologists as well as a form of scientific practice. Community psychologists' core values have been dynamically influenced by the interrelated realities of individual career advancement and the subdiscipline's credibility vis-a-vis mainstream psychology.;The informants unanimously agreed that journal policies should be changed to encourage authors to practice and describe a democratic research relationship. Furthermore, they identified specific ways in which to rectify the discrepancy between values and investigative practice, including training guidelines. But the conventions of hierarchical control associated with scientism and professionalism must be modified to actualize community psychologists' ideals. The dissertation concludes with suggested investigations of research practice in other fields.;In Study 1, trend analyses of research reports from the American Journal of Community Psychology and the Journal of Community Psychology for the years 1973-1983 showed that, according to authors' descriptions, the social and ethical matters intrinsic to community research, such as consent, feedback, and use of the data, were usually unreported and rarely described. Very few studies reported that human subjects played any research role other than data source. |
