Historiometric Methods in Social Psychology

This article was downloaded by: [University of Glasgow]On: 21 December 2014, At: 09:05Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

European Review of SocialPsychologyPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pers20

Historiometric Methods inSocial PsychologyDean Keith Simonton aa University of California , DavisPublished online: 15 Apr 2011.

To cite this article: Dean Keith Simonton (1998) Historiometric Methods inSocial Psychology, European Review of Social Psychology, 9:1, 267-293, DOI:10.1080/14792779843000108

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14792779843000108

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views ofthe authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor andFrancis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, inrelation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pers20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/14792779843000108

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14792779843000108

form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Chapter 8

Historiometric Methods in Social Psychology

Dean Keith Simonton University of California, at Davis

ABSTRACT

Historiometry is a correlational methodology that applies quantitative analyses to archival data concerning historic individuals and events, with the goal of testing nomothetic hypotheses about human behavior. Although not as common as laboratory experiments, this approach was first used in social psychological research about a century ago. Since then, historiometric studies have made important contributions to the scientific understanding of human social behavior. These contributions have touched upon such core issues as attitudes and beliefs, aggression and violence, group dynamics, and leadership. Although the technique must often admit certain disadvantages, historiometry also enjoys some distinct advantages.

Most scientific disciplines are defined substantively rather than methodologi- cally. For example, geologists are scientists who study the earth, using whatever techniques they deem most appropriate for a particular topic or issue. Some geologists conduct field work at interesting research sites, others may design and execute laboratory experiments, and still others will develop math- ematical models. Some geologists will even search through historical records in order to discover the timing, location and intensity of certain phenomena, such as earthquakes or volcanic eruptions. Besides dealing with a significant

European Review of Sociul Psychology, Volume 9. Edited by Wolfgang Slroebe and Miles Hewstone. 0 1998 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14

268 DEAN KEITH SIMONTON

substantive question, the only restriction on this methodological pluralism is that a given technique must produce objective, replicable results.

Social psychology, too, is defined as a substantive domain rather than as a methodological approach. For instance, one best-selling textbook defines the discipline as, “the scientific field that seeks to understand the nature and causes of individual behavior and thought in social situations” (Baron & Byrne, 1994, p. 8). The only methodological qualifier in this definition is the word “scientific”, which is not very restrictive at all, given the tremendous range of techniques commonly seen in the natural and social sciences. In fact, when social psychology first became an organized discipline earlier in this century, the methodological range was quite immense (see e.g., Lindzey & Aronson, 1968; Maccoby, Newcomb, & Hartley, 1958). But with time, one particular method eventually emerged supreme: the laboratory experiment, most often using subjects drawn from the undergraduate population (Sears, 1986). To be sure, many social psychologists will run field experiments, and some will employ survey methods and other correlational techniques. Even so, there can be no doubt that the laboratory experiment has become the method of choice. The approach dominates the research training in the discipline’s graduate programs, and it occupies most of the space in the field’s professional journals.

This methodological dominance is not by itself wrong. If social psychologists were obliged to use just one technique, the laboratory experiment may in fact be the best choice. Nevertheless, there is no a priori rationale for confining the discipline to a single approach. Indeed, restriction to a single methodology can become a handicap if it discourages researchers from using techniques that might be better suited for addressing certain questions of clear substantive importance. Among these diverse alternatives is the method that provides the subject of this chapter-historiometry. Here I will show that historiometric research can provide a tremendous wealth of scientific information about important social psychological phenomena. In particular, I will review some of the substantive areas that have been fruitfully explored using this methodology. I will then evaluate some of the advantages and disadvantages of this distinctive approach. But before I can present this review and evaluation, I first must specify what historiometry is, as well as what it is not.

DEFINITION

Historiometry is one of the oldest approaches in the behavioral and social sciences. The first example may be found in the work of Quetelet (1835/1968), who used the method to examine the relationship between age and creative achievement. Nevertheless, the method did not receive its current name until the beginning of this century, when Woods (1909,1911) endeavored to outline

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14

HISTORIOMETRIC METHODS 269

the scope of this distinctive mode of data collection and analysis. Woods (1913) was also the first researcher to apply the method to social psychological questions, such as the attributes of effective leaders (see also Thorndike, 1936; Woods, 1906). Although the term historiometry passed out of use for about a half century, it has recently come back into vogue (Simonton, 1984~). Historiometry has been defined in a number of ways, some more restrictive than others (Simonton, 1990; Woods, 1909). Nonetheless, for our purposes here we will adopt the most inclusive definition possible:

Historiometry is that collection of methods in which archival data concerning historic individuals and events are subjected to quantitative analyses in order to test nomothetic hypotheses about human thought, feeling, and action.

This statement contains three features that deserve emphasis:

1. The raw data of historiometric investigations do not come from college students in laboratory or field experiments, neither do the data come from survey respondents. Instead, the information base is the historical record. This record features the names, dates and places that fill the historical chronologies, biographical dictionaries and encyclopedias, as well as the documents, products and artifacts that populate museums, libraries and other archives. The individuals who are studied are those who have “made a name for themselves”, such as political leaders (see e.g., Winter, 1980); the events are those that have “left a mark on the times” in which they took place, such as international crises (see e.g., Tetlock, 1979).

2. Qualitative examination of these historical facts and items is not enough. One of the hallmarks of scientific advance is quantification, and historiometry applies this quantification in two ways. First, the raw information from the historical record is subjected to measurement techniques, replacing the subjective and indefinite with the objective and precise. This historiometric measurement yields numbers that represent scores on variables assessed across multiple cases, where the cases may be either individuals or events. An example is the application of content analysis to speeches in order to gauge the cognitive and motivational attributes of leaders (e.g., Miller & Stiles, 1986; Winter & Stewart, 1977; Zullow et al., 1988). Second, these measures are subjected to elaborate statistical analyses. By the very nature of the data, these analyses are correlational in nature. The most frequently used statistical methods, in fact, are factor analysis, multiple regression, time-series analysis and, most recently, covariance structure models (Simonton, 1990).

3. The ultimate goal of these statistical analyses is to test some theory or conjecture about the cognitions, emotions and behaviors of people in general. In this sense, the purpose of historiometry is no different than any other method exploited in social psychology. The end result will be some

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


nomothetic statement about which variables or factors tend to be correlated, and the strength of the association. These empirical generalizations are abstracted from the particulars of this historical record in such a way that idiographic particulars can banish. Having removed the names, dates and places, historiometric conclusions can end up being largely indistin- guishable from those drawn from laboratory experiments, field studies or opinion surveys. A good example are the historiometric studies that examine the nomothetic relationship between achievement motivation and risk-taking behavior (e.g., deCharms & Moeller, 1962; McClelland, 1961).

These three features should help us distinguish historiometry from related techniques. In particular, I wish to separate historiometric research from psychohistory and psychobiography, cliometrics, scientometrics and archival data analysis.

Psychohistory and Psychobiography

Historiometric studies are quite distinct from psychohistory and psychobiography. Although the latter scholarly activities begin with historical data, psychohistorians an3 psychobiographers apply qualitative analyses to confirm idiographic questions about particular individuals or events (Cocks & Crosby, 1987; Elms, 1994). In many respects, these practitioners are more focused on historical issues and techniques than on scientific problems and methods (Simonton, 1983b). This stark contrast in emphasis is well illustrated by Erik Erikson’s classic works on Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther. Erikson’s explicit goal is to discern the basis for the idiosyncrasies of each of these leaders, not to learn something about how such forms of leadership operate in general. Erikson’s studies also illustrate one final feature of psychohistorical and psychobiographical research. namely, their strong dependence on psychoanalytic theory. This dependence dates from the very first investigations in this genre. which were published by Sigmund Freud. In contrast, historiometric research can work within any theoretical perspective, psychoanalytic or other- wise. Historiometry is a methodology, not a theory.

Despite the divergent goals, historiometry will sometimes form a hybrid relationship with psychohistorical and psychobiographical research. One example is “single-case historiometry”, which examines applied quantitative techniques to address an idiographic rather than nomothetic question (e.g.. Winter & Carlson, 1988). Nonetheless, such hybrid methodologies are too rare to threaten the distinction.

Cliometrics

A bit closer to the historiometric enterprise is cliometrics. Like the historiometrician, the cliometrician applies quantitative techniques to histori-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


cal data. However, cliometrics is more like psychohistory in the sense that it is more interested in idiographic rather than nomothetic questions. Moreover, just as psychohistory and psychobiography are dominated by psychoanalysis, cliometric studies, properly speaking, are directed by macroeconomic theory and research. In line with this substantive direction, cliometricians are invariably interested in explicating major economic events and forces.

A good example of these characteristics is the work of Robert Fogel, who won the 1993 Nobel Prize for his application of cliometrics to economic history. Fogel’s pioneer investigations addressed such issues as the economic profitability of slavery in the ante-bellum American South (Fogel & Engerman, 1974) and the contributions of the railroads to the economic development of the American West (Fogel, 1964). These cliometric inquiries apply macroeconomic theory and econometric methods in order to resolve specific idiographic questions in the history of the US economy. For example, slavery in general may or may not be profitable without challenging in any way a specific inference regarding the profitability of that “peculiar institution” in the Southern plantations prior to the Civil War.

It is perhaps unfortunate that cliometrics has become so closely tied to economic history. Although the term has the same etymological meaning as historiometrics, cliometrics is certainly a less awkward word to pronounce.

Scientometrics

Scientometric investigations are devoted to the quantitative study of science. The first important example of this approach is Galton’s (1874) questionnaire survey of members of the Royal Society of London. With the advent of the journal Scientometrics, the field has received some enhanced recognition as an interdisciplinary enterprise. Scientometric research is primarily conducted by sociologists, psychologists, historians of science and even working scientists. Whatever the discipline, scientometric studies will occasionally count as historiometric studies as well. This overlap occurs whenever the investigation tests nomothetic hypotheses through the quantitative study of historic individuals or events in the history of science. Excellent examples can be found in Sulloway’s (1996) Born to Rebel, in which both eminent scientists and notable scientific events are scrutinized. Many scientometric inquiries using the Science Citation Index or similar bibliographic tool can be considered historiometric as well, at least insofar as the individuals or events can claim some historic importance. An instance is a scientometric and historiometric study of 69 famous American psychologists that used citation indices to measure the magnitude of scientific influence (Simonton, 1992b).

Nonetheless, I should point out that only a small proportion of scientometric studies can be considered historiometric. For example, an inquiry that administers psychometric measures to an unselective sample of scientists at an academic or industrial laboratory cannot be considered

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


historiometric. In addition, and most obviously, only when a historiometric project deals with science can it be considered scientometric. Yet, as will become apparent below, only a small percentage of historiometric inquiries focus on important events or individuals in the history of science. This is especially true within social psychology.

Archival Data Analysis

As the definition given earlier makes clear, historiometric research is essen- tially one particular type of archival data analysis (Simonton, 1981a). After all, the primary data used in historiometry come directly or indirectly from some archival source, such as histories, chronologies, biographical dictionaries, anthologies and the like. Yet there are two features that make historiometric research more specialized. The first, and least restrictive, is that historiometric studies are necessarily quantitative. They entail both the quantification of variables and the statistical analysis of the resulting measures. Many archival studies, in contrast, involve no quantification at all. This is true not only of psychobiography and psychohistory, which are inherently archival, but also of most history of science, including the history of psychology (Simonton, 1995a).

The second difference has to do with the fact that historiometry deals not just with the historical record, but with the record of historic events or people in the strictest sense. According to the dictionary definition, the italicized word signifies “famous or important in history or potentially so” (Allen, 1990, p. 558). In contrast, the data underlying archival studies may rely on data that are neither historical nor historic. For example, social psychologists may examine the “personals” or “lonely heart” advertisements in newspapers in order to discern some of the factors involved in interpersonal relationships (e.g., Harrison & Saeed, 1977). Such studies are archival-and even quantitative- but not historiometric. Presumably none of the data involved have historic importance.

Admittedly, it is not always easy to draw a fine line between archival studies and that subset that can be properly considered historiometric. Historic importance or significance is a continuous rather than a categorical variable. For example, the differential eminence of individuals may range from those who have enjoyed international fame for several centuries to those whose accom- plishments are just barely preserved in the historical record (see Simonton, 1991). Similarly, historical events may range from obviously historic occasions, such as battles, revolutions and political crises (e.g., Suedfeld, Corteen, & McCormick, 1986), to less well-defined circumstances, such as statistics regarding the lynching of Blacks in the American South (e.g., Hepworth & West, 1988). However, the latter events often had historic consequences, as when they served as statistical fuel for the anti-lynching campaigns of such African-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


American notables as Ida Bell Wells-Barnett. As a result, these lynching statistics are often reported in historical chronologies and encyclopedias. Hence, studies using such data can be considered historiometric for the purposes of this review.

SUBSTANTIVE APPLICATIONS

Textbooks will often claim that the first laboratory experiment in social psychology was that published by Triplett (1898) a century ago. With equal justification, however, this same journal article can be considered the first historiometric investigation in social psychology. Part I of Triplett’s pioneer inquiry is completely devoted to a nomothetic and quantitative analysis of the bicycle racing records kept by the Racing Board or the League of American Wheelmen. This analysis represents the first empirical demonstration of social facilitation effects in the published literature. Neither is this the last contribution of historiometric research to social psychology. To be sure, many historiometric inquiries have concentrated on topics that lie at the periphery of the mainstream discipline. In this category we may place the contributions to the following three domains:

1.

2.

3.

Health psychology Under this heading we may place the studies of the impact of historical events on the rates of suicide and other fatalities (e.g., Boor, 1981; Boor & Fleming, 1984). Especially interesting is the work on the “Werther effect,” that is, the widespread imitation of celebrity suicides (Phillips, 1974; Stack, 1987; Wasserman, 1984). Under this subject we might also put a recent investigation of how social and personal stressors contributed to the physical and mental health over fully 52 years of a single individual’s life (Simonton, 1998). Empirical aesthetics Insofar as artistic expression constitutes a form of communication, and even a special type of interpersonal influence, it can be considered a social psychological phenomenon (see Child, 1968). Granting this connection would allow us to cite the historiometric research concerning the aesthetics of literature, music and other art forms (e.g., Farnsworth, 1969; Simonton, 1980b, 1997b). One of the most significant long-term research programs in this area is that of Colin Martindale (e.g., 1975, 1990) who has focused on the determinants of stylistic changes, especially .in literature. Social psychology of creativity Several researchers trained as social psychologists have examined the social factors that underlie creative behavior (e.g., Amabile, 1983). The main contribution of historiometry to this topic has been the study of how interpersonal relationships contribute to the develoDment and manifestation of eminent creative achievements r----- . .. . . . . . .

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


(Simonton, 1984a, 1992d). Of special interest are the numerous studies of the impact of role models and mentors (e.g., Simonton, 1975, 1976a, 1988a), a phenomenon that also applies to political leadership (Simonton, 1983a). Interestingly, some of these social influences can span generations (Simonton, 1984a, 1992d) and even originate from outside the particular culture in which the creator lives (Simonton, 1997a).

Whether or not we accept the foregoing research as strictly social psychological depends on how restrictively we define the discipline. Even so, historiometry has also advanced our understanding of many social psychological phenomena that define the discipline’s very core. To document this claim, I now provide an overview of the historiometric studies of attitudes, aggression, groups and leadership.

Attitudes and Beliefs

Attitudes are often seen as the most central of all issues in social psychology. Thus it comes as no surprise that historiometricians have often addressed this topic. For example, several valuable historiometric articles have been published concerning the operation of prejudicial gender stereotypes (e.g., O’Kelley, 1980; Simonton, 1992a; Spilka, Lacey, & Gelb, 197940). However, the following three areas have attracted the most research.

1. Public opinion is probably the single most important manifestation of attitudes, for such collective beliefs will often have consequences of historic scope. Political psychologists have taken special interest in how support for a nation’s leaders changes according to external circumstances. And, of all such leaders, Presidents of the United States have received the most attention, given that the ups and downs in their approval ratings can decide the course of legislation and the fate of elections (Bond & Fleisher, 1984; Sigelman, 1979). A huge literature, in fact, has examined how the chief executive’s popularity fluctuates according to economic statistics, international crises, military conflicts and diverse headline news items (e.g., Kinder, 1981; Monroe, 1979; Sigelman & Knight, 1983, 1985a, 1985b). One striking feature of this literature is the realization that the chief executive’s approval rating is very much at the mercy of events over which he has little or no control. The popularity of a nation’s leader entails an attributional process in which all sorts of extraneous factors intrude.

2. Perhaps the most fascinating beliefs are those that are associated with the coherent organizations of attitudes that we style ideologies. Moreover, these ideologies become especially fascinating for social psychologists when particular ideological positions are found to be linked to psychologi-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


cal variables. A excellent illustration is the large body of research showing how content analytical scores on conceptual (or integrative) complexity predict a politician’s stand on a host of ideologically divisive issues, such as isolationism vs. internationalism, slavery vs. abolitionism, and capitalism vs. socialism (Tetlock, 1981a, 1983; Tetlock, Armor, & Peterson, 1994). This research program has two remarkable features. First, the content analytical coding scheme was adapted from an established psychometric instrument, the Paragraph Completion Test, thus providing the measure with strong empirical and theoretical roots (Schroder, Driver, & Streufert, 1967). Second, the relationships between ideology and cognitive complexity replicate across different nations, such as the UK (Tetlock, 1984) vs. the Soviet Union (Tetlock & Boettger, 1989), and across different types of social actors, such as US Senators (Tetlock, Hannum, & Micheletti, 1984) vs. Justices of the US Supreme Court (Tetlock, Bernzweig, & Gallant, 1985). No matter has local and representative, low conceptual complexity tends to be associated with taking extremist positions on either side of the political spectrum, whereas high complexity tends to be associated with the advocacy of more moderate positions.

3. The classic studies of the authoritarian personality (Adorno et al., 1950) have inspired several intriguing inquiries using historiometric methods. The special goal of this work has been to show how the prominence of authoritarian attitudes in a nation is influenced by threatening circumstances, especially those economic in nature (Doty, Peterson, & Winter, 1991; McCann, 1990, 1991; McCann & Stewin, 1984, 1987; Padgett & Jorgenson, 1982; Sales, 1973). Typically, one or more component of the authoritarian personality, such as superstition, conventionality and authoritarian aggression, is gauged using historiometric indicators, which are then correlated with measures of external threat. These studies have provided ample evidence that authoritarianism is an all too common (and dangerous) response to menacing political and economic environments (see also Simonton, 1976b). Because the authoritarian personality is associated with racist and ethnocentric views, we should probably also note the existence of studies concerning the historic conditions that are most strongly associated with discrimination and prejudice (e.g., Simonton, 1992a).

Lastly, I would just like to mention some intriguing research germane to the classic issue of individual differences in persuasibility (i.e., susceptibility to attitude change). In particular, several investigators have tested and confirmed “Planck’s principle”, which asserts that younger scientists are more likely to accept innovative ideas than are older scientists (Hull, Tessner, & Diamond, 1978; Messerli, 1988; Sulloway, 1996).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14

276

Aggression and Violence

DEAN KEITH SIMONTON

Of all social phenomena, aggression and violence are the most dramatic, and usually the most tragic besides. Moreover, this form of social pathology may occur on more than one level, from the homicidal acts of single individuals to the sanguine conflicts of whole nations. Because these events often attain historic importance, it would seem an ideal place to apply historiometric methods. Certainly no aggressive behavior in the laboratory cubicle can match the scope and impact of notorious murders and disastrous wars. Hence, it should not surprise us that there actually exists a respectable amount of historiometric research on the antecedents of violent behavior. The following five circumstances are worth special mention:

1.

2.

3.

4.

Laboratory experiments have indicated that aggressive behavior may be a function of ambient temperature (Anderson, 1989). This finding has its counterpart in the historical arena, as shown by studies of the “long, hot summer effect”, an examination of the relationship between ambient temperature and the occurrence of riots in American inter-cities (e.g., Baron & Ransberger, 1978; Carlsmith & Anderson, 1979). This linkage was also demonstrated in major league baseball: pitchers are most likely to hit batters when the weather becomes hot and sultry as well (Reifman, Larrick, & Fein, 1991). These results are consistent with the more perva- sive tendency for criminal violence to increase when the temperatures reach uncomfortable levels (Anderson, 1989). Experiments with animals have demonstrated the pathological repercussions of excessive population density, including increases in lethal violence (Marsden, 1972). One historiometric investigation showed that major re- volts and rebellions tend to follow sudden and drastic population growth (Matossian & Schafer, 1977). Interestingly, the augmented violence tended to occur when members of the “baby-boom” generation reached their 20s. In line with the classic frustration-aggression hypothesis (Dollard et al., 1939), some investigators have looked at whether aggressive acts against minorities may be precipitated by widely-spread economic downturns. The best example is the relationship that has been established between the state of the farm economy in the American South and the frequency with which African-Americans became victimized by lynch mobs (Hepworth & West, 1988; Hovland & Sears, 1940; Mintz, 1946). Closely related is the research on the relationship between relative deprivation and civil violence (e.g., Thompson, 1989). Social learning theory has also inspired experiments indicating how aggression may be stimulated by exposure to aggressive models (Bandura, 1973). Archival research has indicated how these results have parallels in many social phenomena, especially in the impact of mass-media violence

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


on homicidal behaviors (Phillips, 1986). A subset of these studies may be classified as historiometric in essential nature. For example, championship boxing matches have been shown to be associated with increases in homicides in the general population (Miller et aL, 1991; Phillips, 1983). Moreover, models of aggression can leave their imprint in the political sphere as well. For example, military leaders are most likely to have been exposed to models of military leadership in their youth (Simonton, 1988a, 1997). In addition, those who gain power through violent means are more likely to lose power to others who decide to follow their example (Simonton, 1984d). Those who live by the sword do indeed tend to die by the sword.

5. Much violence at the societal level is inadvertent rather than deliberate. World War I provides the perfect illustration, for none of Europe’s leaders at the time thought that the actions they were taking during the Balkan crisis would precipitate an all-out military conflict. Instead, they made poor decisions that aggravated rather than ameliorated the crisis. To explore this process further, several investigators have applied content analytical techniques to historical documents in order to gauge the conceptual (or “integrative”) complexity of the decision makers (e.g., Ballard, 1983; Suedfeld, Wallace, & Thachuk, 1993). These studies repeatedly demonstrate that the outbreak of violence during a major crisis can be predicted if conceptual complexity decreases rather than increases (Raphael, 1982; Suedfeld & Tetlock, 1977; Suedfeld, Tetlock, & Ramirez, 1977). Fluctuations in complexity can even predict the occurrence of surprise attacks (Suedfeld & Bluck, 1988 Wallace, Suedfeld, & Thachuk, 1993). Curiously, conceptual complexity also may be associated with a general’s success on the battlefield (Suedfeld, Corteen, & McCormick, 1986). To avoid war, leaders must exhibit high complexity; to succeed in war, they may need the same cognitive asset.

Besides discerning the causes of aggression, the historiometric literature has taken special interest in the repercussions of acts of aggression. This attention is quite natural, given that much of history is little more that a narrative of military conflicts, rebellions and politically motivated homicides (Simonton, 1994). Moreover, just as some investigators may take interest in the impact of natural disasters upon human behavior, so may other investigators find themselves fascinated with the repercussions of human-made tragedies. The historic acts of violence that have received the most attention are assassinations, civil unrest and international war (e.g., Simonton, 1975, 1976a, 1976b). These dramatic events have powerful consequences on the expressive activities, ideologies, and social behaviors of those who are at the receiving end. For example, by exposing thousands if not millions of citizens to authorized killing during wartime, a society may later suffer an increase in homicide during the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14

278 DEAN KEITH SlMONTON

ensuing period of putative peace (Archer & Gartner, 1984): violence becomes legitimized.

Group Dynamics For the most part, individuals have a better chance of making history within groups rather than operating solely as individuals. Even an introverted genius such as Isaac Newton depended greatly on the stimulation, encouragement and support of his friends and enemies in the scientific community (Simonton, 1992d). Below are just three examples of how historiometric methods have provided some useful and often even unique knowledge about group-level behaviors of historic impact:

1. When individuals form groups to achieve some goal, the result is not always greater than the sum of its parts, and sometimes the outcome can even fall short. Two heads are not always greater than one. One reason for this effect is the phenomenon of “social loafing” (Latand, Williams, & Harkins, 1979). When individuals submerge themselves in group activities, responsibility for performance is diffused among the membership rather than focused in a single person. This curious but important phenomenon has been empirically demonstrated in a study of the Lennon-McCartney collaboration that made the Beatles so popular (Jackson & Padgett, 1982). During the period when the actual composers were not explicitly identi- fied-a situation that maximizes the odds of social loafing-those songs composed by either Beatle alone were more popular than those composed by the two Beatles working together.

2. Quantitative analyses of wins and losses in team sports have consistently demonstrated the influence of the home-field advantage (Courneya & Carron, 1992; Schwartz & Barsky, 1977). In both professional and colle- giate sports, the home team enjoys an edge over the visiting team. Inter- estingly, a home-field dkudvunruge may sometimes occur in sports championships (Baumeister & Steinhilber, 1984). an effect apparently due to “choking under pressure” (Baumeister & Showers, 1986). A parallel disadvantage occurs in the most urgent of all team competitions, namely, the confrontation between two opposed armies on the battlefield (Simonton, 1980a). Armies defending their homeland have noticeably lower odds of victory. The home-defense disadvantage results from the fact that the generals of invading armies are more prone to pursue offen- sive tactics and to enter the confrontation with more accumulated battle victories.

3. Irving Janis (1982) introduced the concept of “groupthink” in order to explain how even capable leaders can make disastrous policy decisions. Although the original inquiry was based on the qualitative examination of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


historical documents-such as those regarding the Bay of Pigs incursion and the Cuban missile crisis-subsequent studies have subjected these materials to quantitative analysis (Guttieri, Wallace, & Suedfeld, 1995; Herek, Janis, & Huth, 1987, 1989; Tetlock, 1979). These investigations have clarified the precise ways that groupthink does and does not work in political decision making.

Because groupthink is a phenomenon concerning ingroupoutgroup behavior, it is probably appropriate here to mention an interesting study by Winter (1987a). which showed how the perceived power motivation of the enemy becomes enhanced during the escalation of conflict between two groups.

Leadership

Of all substantive domains within social psychology, the study of leadership seems to lend itself most naturally to historiometric methods. Those individuals who attain the highest levels of leadership will almost invariably leave their names to posterity. Furthermore, because the achievements of leaders are most often highly public events, the historical materials regarding their careers are exceptionally complete. In any case, historiometric work has examined all varieties of leadership, including hereditary monarchs and prime ministers, US presidents and presidential candidates, Supreme Court justices, state governors, senators and parliamentarians, members of the Soviet Polit- buro, ambassadors and other diplomats, military commanders, revolutionaries and political activists, and entrepreneurs (e.g., Hermann, 1980a; Suedfeld & Rank, 1976; Tetlock, 1981b). The dependent and independent variables fea- tured in these inquiries are equally diverse. Thus, the criteria of leadership can include election success, effectiveness as a legislator, popularity in the polls, success in establishing a new revolutionary government, victory on the battlefield, posthumous reputation, greatness or eminence, policy preferences, executive decisions and appointments, and the style of leadership. In the last category may be placed the recent attempts to address the phenomenon of charisma (e.g., House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991; O’Connor et al., 1995; Simonton, 1988b). The predictor variables, moreover, may entail biographical events and experiences, personality traits, motivational profiles, cognitive styles and capacities, interpersonal relationships and numerous situational factors (e.g., Zullow & Seligman, 1990, Zweigenhaft, 1975).

Given the immense size of this literature, it is not easy to decide which results should be highlighted. However, perhaps the following four broad findings are of the most general interest:

1. Leadership is a multidimensional rather than unidimensional phenomenon (Simonton, 1995b). As a consequence, alternative measures may not

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


2.

3.

4.

converge on a single consensus regarding individual differences in performance. For example, the contemporary popularity of US presidents is not associated with their long-term success (Simonton, 1987b). Moreover, the same variable that might predict excellent performance by one criterion might also predict inferior performance by another criterion (Simonton, 1986b; Winter, 1987b). Leadership is usually a function of both individual and situational factors (e.g., Ballard & Suedfeld, 1988). However, it is rare for individual variables to account for most of the predicted variance, and sometimes situational factors will account for all of the predictive power (e.g., Simonton, 1985b). In the latter case, leadership is merely a matter of a person happening to be at the right place at the right time. Leadership is at times determined by rather complex relationships, such as curvilinear functions and interaction effects (Simonton, 1995b). The most interesting of these complications, perhaps, are the appearance of individual X situational interactions, because these suggest that sometimes successful leadership is a matter of being the right person at the right place at the right time. In the specific case of US presidents, leadership may require the intricate matching of personal characteristics and political zeitgeist (e.g., McCann, 1995; Simonton, 1987a; Stewart, 1977). Many of these historiometric inquiries have converged on a set of empirical findings that closely parallel what has been observed in more everyday populations. For instance, the impact of certain motivational profiles may be no different for historic leaders than for more everyday forms of leadership (see Spangler & House, 1991; Winter, 1973; Winter, 1987b). Likewise, intelligence is one of the best predictors of leadership for both historic and contemporary populations (Simonton, 1985a, 1995b; McCann, 1992). When corroborative results emerge from divergent methodologies, we can have greater confidence that we are obtaining a scientifically secure understanding of the phenomenon.

EVALUATION

Judging from the above discussion, historiometric inquiries have produced many valuable results. Given the richness of these'findings, it may be surpris- ing that historiometric methods are not more widely seen in the discipline. Of course, one possible explanation for this scarcity may be that historiometry is plagued by certain problems that severely limit its scientific utility. Nonethe- less, like any other method, historiometry has advantages as well as disadvantages. Accordingly, the choice of approach must always be guided by a careful consideration of the tradeoffs between the assets and the drawbacks. To appreciate this tradeoff better, let us examine the pros and cons.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14

HISTOMOMETRIC METHODS 281

Disadvantages

There are likely many reasons why historiometry is so rarely used by social psychologists. Perhaps the most manifest reason is simply that few graduate programs offer much training in the diverse techniques required to conduct competent historiometric research. Instead, the emphasis of most programs is on experimental methods, especially laboratory experiments. Nonetheless, this lack of attention itself probably reflects a widespread belief that historiometric methods suffer from limitations that severely constrain their utility. The main drawbacks of historiometry are probably three in number:

1. Substantive upplicubiliry The most obvious shortcoming of historiometric methods is that they are probably not applicable to a wide range of topics of central interest to social psychologists. The four phenomena most frequently investigated-attitudes and beliefs, aggression and violence, group dynamics and leadership-are precisely those that are most likely to have an impact on the larger stage of history. Because other topics lack this critical feature, they are only investigated occasionally, if at all. For example, despite the prominent place interpersonal attraction enjoys as a social psychological topic, probably only two studies might be best styled historiometric (viz., Cunningham, 1986, Lehman, 1953). In one of these investigations, for example, the box-office appeal of movie stars was shown to vary according to the star’s age, with rather distinctive curves for actors and actresses (Lehman, 1953). In line with a sociobiological explanation, the different curves closely parallel the differential longitudinal changes in fertility for men and women (cf. Buss, 1988). Needless to say, many other mainstream topics in social psychology cannot even claim a single contribution from historiometric methods.

2. Scientific rigor Another common concern about historiometric research is the degree of inferential precision the method can support. Social psychologists pride themselves on being behavioral scientists, and many ex- press skepticism about any method that takes them too far from the confines of the laboratory experiment. Skepticism specifically directed at historiometry may take two independent forms. First, there is the question of the reliability of the data. Biographical and historical information may be subject to various kinds of errors and even outright bias (Simonton, 1990). Even content analytical measures may vary greatly in their ex- pected reliability coefficients. Second comes the matter of causal inference. Historiometric research must necessarily rely on correlational methods which are less powerful than experimental methods. The researcher certainly cannot randomly assign historic persons or events to control and treatment groups. As with all correlational methods, therefore, the danger always exists that some relationships might be the spuri- ous consequence of some unexamined factor.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


3. Time commitment Once a social psychologist's laboratory is set up, experiments can often be designed and executed over a relatively short time- span. The investigator need only put out a sign-up sheet, run a few pilots, refine the procedures, and then run the main batch of participants. Statis- tical analysis, too, can proceed in a more or less straightforward manner- especially when the data are collected with the analysis already in mind. In contrast, anyone who has undertaken an historiometric investigation must have learned very quickly that such studies cannot be executed over a short period. The collection of the raw data may require many trips to libraries and archives, including a heavy reliance on interlibrary loans. The quantification of the variables may require the time-consuming training of research assistants in the use of elaborate coding schemes. And the statistical analyses make take much time owing to the complexity of the techniques required when the investigator cannot completely control the form of the data (e.g., the oocurrence of multicollinear variables and unforeseen sources of methodological artifacts). To offer examples from my own experience, for one project I personally worked at least one hour per day from 1973 to 1987-well over 6,000 hours. Yet from this prodigious effort I managed to publish a single nine-page journal article (Simonton, 1988a). In another project I had to recruit and coordinate almost three dozen research assistants over a period of several years before I had obtained the necessary measures (Simonton, 1996).

The above three disadvantages are all very significant. But I also must argue that these criticisms can be overstated.

Regarding the first problem, even though the substantive applicability of historiometry is pnbably much less broad than more commonplace methods, it is conceivable that many more topics might be subjected to historiometric study if social psychologists had the appropriate background in the relevant techniques. The historical record is so rich in information that it is difficult to conceive that its substantive potential is confined solely to the four main topics reviewed earlier.

Concerning the second matter, the scientific rigor of historiometric research is often underappreciated. Not only can historiometric measures display quite respectable reliability coefficients (e.g., Smith, lm), but in addition the application of advanced multivariate statistics and quasi-experimental designs can help make the causal inferences more secure (e.g., Simonton, 1990). To be sure, not all published studies apply sophisticated tools to relatively hard data. Even so, a method must be judged by the best that it has accomplished, not by the worst applications of the technique.

With respect to the third issue, even the considerable effort often involved in historiometric research can often be mitigated in various ways. For example, once a large database is established on a given sample of eminent people or

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


events, this may become the foundation of a series of investigations that address various aspects of a particular phenomenon (e.g., Simonton, 198%). All told, the disadvantages of historiometry are not so potent as to recommend against its use. Any drawbacks must be judged on a case-by-case basis.

Advantages

Aside from extenuating factors, of course, investigators may turn to historiometric research precisely because the approach has assets not always enjoyed by alternative methods. The following four advantages may be the most important:

1. Exrernul validity One important feature of historiometric research is that it permits generalization to the real world outside the artificial conditions of the laboratory. The basis for this asset is obvious: the raw data of historiometry come directly from the external world in the first place. If high ambient temperatures are associated with increased frequency of urban riots, we cannot question the generalizability of the finding. Because the results depend on unobtrusive or non-reactive measures, we cannot dismiss the findings simply by appealing to experimenter expectancy effects, enlightenment effects, or similar contaminants (Webb et al., 1981). To be sure, one might wonder whether the relationship holds in other cultures and different periods. But that question itself may be best an- swered by conducting additional historiometric research-which brings us to the next point.

2. Cross-cultural invariance Because the historical record is not confined by time or place, historiometric studies can help ensure that empirical generalizations are crossculturally and transhistorically invariant (Simonton, 1984b, 1990). Hence, the relationship between heat and public violence is not confined to the individuals who happen to reside in the twentieth- century USA or other modem nation. Long ago, in fact, Lombroso (18991 1911) scrutinized 836 uprisings that occurred between 1791 and 1880, showing not only that July was the preferred month for unrest in Europe but also that January was the most vulnerable month in South America, where the seasons are inverted with respect to the calendar. If one goal of any science is to identify the universals that transcend a particular time and place, then historiometry provides an excellent means to achieve that end. Some historiometric investigations have even established regularities in human social behavior that span several centuries and cut across dozens of nations (Simonton, 1990).

3. Variable accessibility The foregoing illustrations pinpoint another asset of historiometric inquiries. Often researchers cannot investigate certain variables owing to various practical or ethical constraints; and even if

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


certain variables are accessible, it may not be possible to study them over the full variation observed in the human species. Aggression is an excellent case in point. Experimental social psychologists are compelled to measure aggressive behavior by the meekest of means, such as the level of non-lethal electric shock that they are evidently willing to administer to another human being. This is a very narrow range of displayed behavior in comparison to what is seen in an inter-city riot. Indeed, aggression outside the laboratory may take the most extreme form of outright homicide, an act that could not possibly be examined in laboratory settings, or even in field experiments. Hence, if we wish to determine whether models of aggression can provoke homicidal reactions, we may really have no other choice but to gauge whether, say, high-publicity prize fights have any effect on homicide rates. Unit replicability We can use the aggression research to indicate one final virtue of historiometric research, a virtue not seldom shared by any other method: the capacity to study the same units over and over (Simonton, 1990). When Hovland and Sears (1940) first examined the relationship between crop prizes and the lynching of Blacks in the American South, they did not have at their disposal the advanced time-series techniques available today. In time, that would lead scholars to wonder how much the reported results could be trusted. Yet the data on which their analyses were based are part of the historical record, and as such the numbers are readily available for secondary analyses that have vindicated the overall conclusion using more sophisticated analyses (Hepworth & West, 1988). Moreover, because the units under investigation are precisely the same, it is possible to add new variables in order to generate more comprehensive models of the phenomena. A case in point is the extensive research on political leadership conducted using the Presidents of the United States (Simonton, 1987b). If one investigator believes that another investigator left out some crucial variable, nothing prevents himher from doing the analyses all over again with the omission corrected (see e.g., McCann, 1992; Simonton, 1981b, 1986b, 1992c; Wendt & Light, 1976). This asset of unit replicability is extremely important, because it permits researchers to replicate results exactly, right down to the double-precision statistics if necessary, given that sampling fluctuations are necessarily reduced to zero. If the replicability of empirical findings is a hallmark of scientific progress, then historiometric methods provide an excellent means to achieve that end.

4.

For certain substantive questions, the above four advantages may more than compensate for the three disadvantages discussed earlier. The assets may be especially crucial in grappling with various issues in domains of applied social psychology. Many illustrations come from the research in political psychology.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Several investigators have shown how the policy preferences and decisive actions of political leaders can be predicted on the basis of social psychological variables (e.g., Hermann, 1980b; Satterfield & Seligman, 1994; Tetlock, 1985; Winter, 1993). The strength of these findings depends directly on the fact that they involved the direct historiometric examination of politicians rather than relying on the tenuous extrapolation from what holds in the more typical subject pools in social psychology.

CONCLUSION

This overview of historiometric research has been all too brief. In the first place, the review of the substantive findings could only scan the contributions that historiometric research has made to some of the core topics in social psychology. Even worse, space limitations have obliged me to merely skim over the diverse technical complexities. Fortunately, elsewhere I have published book-length reviews of both the empirical findings (Simonton, 1994) and the methodological issues (Simonton, 1990) associated with historiometric research. An interested reader can therefore consult these sources for more details.

I must stress that we should not consider historiometry a rival method. Rather, it should be considered merely part of the repertoire of potential methods that social psychologists have at their disposal. There will be substantive questions that only historiometric research can adequately answer, and other issues that only experimental methods can easily address. More impor- tantly, sometimes the researcher will confront a hypothesis that can be tackled by two or more methods simultaneously. Indeed, as already pointed out, the first historiometric study in social psychology, that by Triplett (1898), also incorporated laboratory experimentation in the same investigation. Other researchers have done the same. For example, Frank and Gilovich (1988) used both experimental and historiometric data to study how wearing black uniforms affected perceived and actual aggressive behavior. Even if historiometry is not combined with some other technique in the same inquiry, publications using different methods may serve to reinforce each other. For instance, on the basis of historiometric research, Simonton (1986b) devised an equation for predicting presidential leadership. After formulating an attributional model to explain the equation, Simonton (1986a) conducted a laboratory experiment in which subjects were able to replicate the same judgments used by historians to evaluate presidential performance. Alternatively, empirical findings obtained by more conventional methods may be tested or extended using historiometric data. For example, historiometric studies have indicated how the experimentally established relationship between exposure frequency and interpersonal attraction may have its counterpart in the world of electoral

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


politics (Grush, 1980, Grush, McKeough, & Ahlering, 1978). Hence, historiometric research can enter into complementary relationships with other, more mainstream approaches to scientific inquiry.

Admittedly, historiometry can not and should not become the dominant method in social psychology. Experiments will probably always dominate the scholarly literature, and with ample justification. Yet the advance of any scientific discipline will suffer when the hegemony of one technique becomes so supreme that significant research questions are scrutinized with methods that are less that optimal-if the questions are not ignored entirely. Hence, I hope the current review will inspire more social psychologists to exploit historiometric methods as the occasion demands. The encouragement of such methodological pluralism can only serve to enhance the vitality of the field.

REFERENCES

Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (Eds) (1950).

Allen, R. E. (Ed.) (1990). Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English (8th edn). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity. New York: Springer- Verlag.

Anderson, C. A. (1989). Temperature and aggression: Ubiquitous effects of heat on Occurrence of human violence. Psychological Bulletin, 106.76%.

Archer, D., & Gartner, R. (1984). Violence and Crime in Cross-national Perspective. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Ballard, E. J. (1983). Canadian prime ministers: Complexity in political crises. Canadian Psychology, 24,125-9.

Ballard, E. J., & Suedfeld, P. (1988). Performance ratings of Canadian prime ministers: Individual and situational factors. Political Psychology, 9,291-302.

Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: Social Learning Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Baron, R. A,, & Byme, D. (1994). Social Psychology: Understanding Human Interac- tion (7th edn). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Baron, R. A., & Ransberger, V. M. (1978). Ambient temperature and the Occurrence of collective violence: The "long, hot summer" revisited. Journal of Personality and

Baumeister, R. E., & Showers, C. J. (1986). A review of paradoxical performance effects: Choking under pressure in sports and mental tests. European Journal of Social Psychology, 16,361443.

Baumeister, R. E., & Steinhilber, A. (1984). Paradoxical effects of supportive audi- ences on performance under pressure: The home field disadvantage in sports championships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47,85-93.

Bond, J. R., & Fleisher, R. (1984). Presidential popularity and congressional voting: A reexamination of public opinion as a source of influence in Congress. Western Polikal Quarterly, 37,291-306.

Boor, M. (1981). Effects of United States presidential elections on suicide and other causes of death. American Sociological Review, 46,61618.

The Authoritarian Personality. New York: Harper.

Social Psychology, 36,351-60.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14

HISTORIOMETRIC M m O D S 287

Boor, M., & Fleming, J. A. (1984). Presidential election effects on suicide and mortal- ity levels are independent of unemployment rates. American Sociological Review, 49, 706-7.

Buss, D. M. (1988). Love acts: The evolutionary biology of love. In R. J. Sternberg & M. L. Barnes (Eds), The Psychology of Love (pp. 100-118). New Haven, CT Yale University Press.

Carlsmith, J. M., & Anderson, C. A. (1979). Ambient temperature and the occurrence of collective violence: A new analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37,3374.

Child, I. L. (1968). Esthetics. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds), The Handbook of Social Psychology (2nd edn, Vol. 3, pp. 853-916). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Courneya, K. S., & Carron, A. V. (1992). The home advantage in sport competitions: A literature review. Jownal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 1413-27.

Cocks, G., & Crosby, T. L. (Eds) (1987). Psychdhisrory: Readings in rhe Method of Psychology, Psychoanalysis, and History. New Haven, CR Yale University Press.

Cunningham, M. R. (1986). Measuring the physical in physical attractiveness: Quasi- experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty: J o u d of Personality and Social Psychology, 58,925-35.

dechanns, R., & Moeller, G. H. (1962). Values expressed in American children’s readers: 18a)-1950. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64,136-42.

Dollard, J., Doob, L., Miller, N. E., Mower, 0. H., & Sears, R. R. (1939). Frustrarion and Aggression. New Haven, CT Yale University Press.

Doty, R. M., Peterson, B. E., & Winter, D. G. (1991). Threat and authoritarianism in the United States, 1978-1987. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61,629- 40.

Elms, A. C. (1994). Uncovering Lives: The Uneasy Alliance of Biography and Psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.

Farnsworth, P. R. (1%9). The Social Psychology of Music (2nd edn). Ames I W Iowa State University Press.

Fogel, R. W. (1964). Railroads and American Economic Growrh. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Fogel. R. W., & Engerman, S. L. (1974). Time on rhe Cross. Boston, MA: Little. Brown.

Frank, M. G., & Gilovich, T. (1988). The dark side of self- and social perception: Black uniforms and aggression in professional sports. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54.7446.

Galton, F. (1874). English Men of Science: Their Nature and Nurture. London: Macmillan.

Grush, J. E. (1980). Impact of candidate expenditures, regionality, and prior out- comes on the 1976 Democratic presidential primaries. Journal of Personality and

Grush, J. E., McKeough, K. L., & Ahlering, R. F. (1978). Extrapolating laboratory exposure research to actual political elections. Journal of Personality and Social

Guttieri, K., Wallace, M. D., & Suedfeld, P. (1995). The integrative complexity of American decision makers in the Cuban missile crisis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 39,595-621.

Harrison, A. A., & Saeed. L. (1977). Let’s make a deal: An analysis of revelations and stipulations in lonely hearts advertisements. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35,257-64.

Hepworth, J. T., & West, S. G. (1988). Lynchings and the economy: A time-series

Social Psychology, 3,337-47.

PSyChOlOgy, 36,257-70.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


reanalysis of Hovland and Sears (1940). Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- ogy, 55,239-47.

Herek, G. M., Janis, 1. L., & Huth, P. (1987). Decision making during international crises: Is quality of process related to outcome? Journal of Conflict Resolution, 31, 203-26.

Herek, G. M., Janis, I. L., & Huth, P. (1989). Quality of US decision making during the Cuban missile crisis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 33,446-59.

Hermann, M. G. (1980a). Assessing the personalities of Soviet Politburo members. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6 , 332-52.

Hermann, M. G. (1980b). Explaining foreign policy using personal characteristics of political leaders. International Studies Quarterly, 24, 7-46.

House, R. J., Spangler, W. D., & Woycke, J. (1991). Personality and charisma in the US presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36,364-%.

Hovland, C. J., & Sears, R. R. (1940). Minor studies in aggression: 6. Correlation of lynchings with economic indices. Journal of Psychology, 9,301-10.

Hull, D. L., Tessner, P. D., & Diamond, A. M. (1978). Planck’s principle: Do younger scientists accept new scientific ideas with greater alacrity than older scientists? Science, 2Q2.717-23.

Jackson, J. M., & Padgett, V. R. (1982). With a little help from my friend: Social loafing and the Lennon-McCartney songs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulle- tin, 8, 672-7.

Janis, I. L. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes (2nd edn). Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.

Kinder, D. R. (1981). Presidents, prosperity, and public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45, 1-21.

LatanC, B., Williams, K., & Harkins, S. (1979). Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-

Lehman, H. C. (1953). Age and Achievement. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Lindzey, G., & Aronson, E. (Eds) (1968). A Handbook of Social Psychology (2nd edn). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Lombroso, C. (1911). Crime: Its Causes and Remedies. Boston, MA: Little, Brown (original work published 1899).

Maccoby, E. E., Newcomb, T. M., & Hartley, E. L. (Eds) (1958). Readings in Social Psychology (3rd edn). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Marsden, H. M. (1972). Crowding and animal behavior. In J. F. Wohlwill & D. H. Carson (Eds), Environment and the Social Sciences: Perspectives and Applications (pp. 5-14). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Martindale, C. (1975). Romantic Progression: The Psychology of Literary History. Washington, D C Hemisphere.

Martindale, C. (1990). The Clockwork Muse: The Predictability of Artistic Styles. New York: Basic Books.

Matossian, M. K., & Schafer, W. D. (1977). Family, fertility, and political violence, 1700-1900. Journal of Social History, 11,137-78.

McCann, S. J. H. (1990). Threat, power, and presidential greatness: Harding to Johnson. Psychological Reports, 66, 129-30.

McCann, S. J. H. (1991). Threat, authoritarianism, and the power of United States presidents: New threat and power measures. Journal of Psychology, l25,237-40.

ogy, 37,822-32.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


McCann, S. J. H. (1992). Alternative formulas to predict the greatness of US presidents: Personological, situational, and zeitgeist factors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62,469-79.

McCann, S. J. H. (1995). Presidential candidate age and Schlesinger’s cycles of American history (1789-1992): When younger is better. Political Psychology, 16, 749-55.

McCann, S. J. H., & Stewin, L. L. (1984). Environmental threat and parapsychologi- cal contributions to the psychological literature. Journal of Social Psychology, 122,

McCann, S . J. H., & Stewin, L. L. (1987). Threat, authoritarianism, and the power of

McClelland, D. C. (l%l). The Achieving Society. New York: Van Nostrand. Messerli, P. (1988). Age differences in the receptiofi of new scientific theories: The

case of plate tectonics theory. Social Studies of Science, 18,91-112. Miller, T. Q., Heath, L., Moican, J. R., & Dugoni, B. L. (1991). Imitative violence in

the real world: A reanalysis of homicide rates following championship prize fights. Aggressive Behavior, 17, 121-34.

Miller, N. L., & Stiles, W. B. (1986). Verbal familiarity in American presidential nomination acceptance speeches and inaugural addresses. Social Psychology Quar- terly, 49, 72-81.

Mintz, A. (1946). A re-examination of correlations between lynchings and economic indices. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41,154-60.

Monroe, K. R. (1979). Econometric analyses of electoral behavior: A critical review. Political Behavior, 1,137-73.

OConnor, J., Mumford, M. D., Clifton, T. C., Gessner, T. L., & Connelly, M. S. (1995). Charismatic leaders and destructiveness: An historiometric study. Leader- ship Quarterly, 6, 529-55.

O’Kelley, C. (1980). Sex-role imagery in modem art: An empirical examination. Sex Roles, 6 , 99-112.

Padgett, V., & Jorgenson, D. 0. (1982). Superstition and economic threat: Germany 1918-1940. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 8,736-41.

Phillips, D. P. (1974). Influence of suggestion on suicide: Substantive and theoretical implications of the Werther Effect. American Sociological Review, 39,340-54.

Phillips, D. P. (1983). The impact of mass media violence on US homicides. American Sociological Review, 48, 560-68.

Phillips, D. P. (1986). Natural experiments on the effects of mass media violence of fatal aggression: Strength and weakness of a new approach. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 207-50). New York: Academic Press.

Quetelet, A. (1968). A Treatise on Man and the Development of His Faculties. New York: Franklin (reprint of an 1842 Edinburgh translation of the 1835 French original).

Raphael, T. D. (1982). Integrative complexity theory and forecasting international crises. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 26,423-50.

Reifman, A. S., Larrick, R. P., & Fein. S. (1991). Temper and temperature on the diamond: The heat-aggression relationship in major league baseball. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 580-85.

Sales, S. M. (1973). Threat as a factor in authoritarianism: An analysis of archival data. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28,44-57.

Sattefield, J. M., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1994). Military aggression and risk predicted by explanatory style. Psychological Science, 5 , 77-82.

227-35.

US presidents. Journal of Psychology, U1,149-57.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Schroder, H. M., Driver, M. J., & Streufert, S . (1%7). Human Information Process- ing: Individuab and Groups Functioning in Complex Social Situations. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Schwa-. B., & Barsky, S. (1977). The home advantage. Social Forces, 55.641-61. Sears, D. 0. (1986). College sophomores in the laboratory: Influences of a narrow

data base on social psychology’s view of human nature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51.515-30.

Sigelman, L. (1979). Residential popularity and presidential elections. Public Opinion Quarterly, 43, 5324.

Sigelman, L., & Knight, K. (1983). Why does presidential popularity decline? A test of the expectatioddisillusion theory. Public Opinion Quarterly, 47,310-24.

Sigelman, L.. & Knight, K. (1985a). Expectatioddisillusion and presidential popularity: The Reagan experience. Public Opinion Quarterly. 49,209-13.

Sigelman, L., & Knight, K. (1985b). Public opinion and presidential responsibility for the economy: Understanding personalization. Political Behavior, 7,167-91.

Simonton, D. K. (1975). Sociocultural context of individual creativity: A transhistorical time-series analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 1 1 19-33.

Simonton, D. K. (1976a). Philosophical eminence, beliefs, and zeitgeist: An individual-generational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 63040.

Simonton, D. K. (1976b). The sociopolitical context of philosophical beliefs: A transhistorical causal analysis. Social Forces, 54.513-23.

Simonton, D. K. (1980a). Land battles, generals, and armies: Individual and situational determinants of victory and casualties. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38,11&19.

Simonton, D. K. (1980b). Thematic fame, melodic originality, and musical zeitgeist: A biographical and transhistorical content analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38,972-83.

Simonton, D. K. (1981a). The library laboratory: Archival data in personality and social psychology. In L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 217-43). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Simonton, D. K. (1981b). Residential greatness and performance: Can we predict leadership in the White House? Journal of Personality, 49.306-23.

Simonton. D. K. (1983a). Intergenerational transfer of individual differences in hereditary monarchs: Genes, role-modeling, cohort, or sociocultural effects? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44,354-64.

Simonton, D. K. (1983b). Psychohistory. In R. Hank & R. Lamb (Eds), The Encyclo- pedic Dictionary of Psychology (pp. 499-500). Oxford Blackwell.

Simonton. D. K. (19%). Artistic creativity and interpersonal relationships across and within generations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1273- 86.

Simonton, D. K. (1984b). Generational time-series analysis A paradigm for studying sociocultural influences. In K. Gergen & M. Gergen (Eds), Historical Social Psychol- ogy (pp. 141-55). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Simonton, D. K. (1984c). Genius, Creativity, and Leadership: Historiometric Inquiries. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Simonton, D. K. (1984d). Leaders as eponyms: Individual and situational determinants of monarchal eminence. Journal of Personality, 52,l-21.

Simonton, D. K. (1985a). Intelligence and personal influence in groups: Four nonlinear models. Psychological Review, 92.532-47.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Simonton, D. K. (1985b). The vice-presidential succession effect: Individual or situational basis? Political Behavior, 7.79-99.

Simonton, D. K. (1%). Dispositional attributions of (presidential) leadership: An experimental simulation of historiometric results. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22,389-418.

Simonton, D. K. (1986b). Presidential personality: Biographical use of the Gough Adjective Check List. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51,14960.

Simonton, D. K. (1987a). Presidential inflexibility and veto behavior: Two individual- situational interactions. Journal of Personality, 55, 1-18.

Simonton, D. K. (1987b). Why Presidents Succeed: A Political Psychology of Leader- ship. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Simonton, D. K. (1988a). Galtonian genius, Kroeberian configurations, and emula- tion: A generational time-series analysis of Chinese civilization. Journal of Personal- ity and Social Psychology, 55.230-38.

Simonton, D. K. (1988b). Presidential style: Personality, biography, and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55,928-36.

Simonton, D. K. (1990). Psychology, Science, and History: An Introduction to Historiometry. New Haven, (JT: Yale University Press.

Simonton, D. K. (1991). Latent-variable models of posthumous reputation: A quest for Galton’s G. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60,607-19.

Simonton, D. K. (1992a). Gender and genius in Japan: Feminine eminence in mascu- line culture. Sex Roles, 27,101-19.

Simonton, D. K. (1992b). Leaders of American psychology, 1879-1967: Career development, creative output, and professional achievement. Journal of Personality and

Simonton, D. K. (1992c). Presidential greatness and personality: A response to McCann (1992). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63,676-9.

Simonton, D. K. (1992d). The social context of career success and course for 2026 scientists and inventors. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18,452-63.

Simonton, D. K. (1994). Greatness: Who Makes History and Why. New York: Guilford.

Simonton, D. K. (1995a). Behavioral laws in histories of psychology: Psychological science, metascience, and the psychology of science. Psychological Inquiries, 6.89- 114.

Simonton, D. K. (1995b). Personality and intellectual predictors of leadership. In D. H. Saklofske & M. Zeidner (Eds), International Handbook of Personality and Intelligence (pp. 739-57). New York: Plenum.

Simonton, D. K. (1996). Presidents’ wives and First Ladies: On achieving eminence within a traditional gender role. Sex Roles, X, 309-36.

Simonton, D. K. (1997a). Foreign influence and national achievement: The impact of open milieus on Japanese civilization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, n, s 9 4 .

Simonton, D. K. (1997b). Products, persons, and periods: Historiometric analyses of compositional creativity. In D. Hariqreaves & A. North (Eds), The Social Psychology of Music pp. 107-122. New York Oxford University Press.

Simonton, D. K. (1998). Mad King George: The impact of personal and political stress on mental and physical health. Journal of Persodity, 66,443-66.

Smith, C. P. (Ed.) (1992). Motivation and Personality: Handbook of Thematic Content Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Spangler, W. D., & House, R. J. (1991). Presidential effectiveness and the leadership motive profile. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60,439-55.

Social PSyCholOgy, 62,5-17.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Spilka, B., Lacey, G., & Gelb, G. (1979-80). Sex discrimination after death: A replication, extension and a difference. Omega: Journal of Death and Dying, 10,227- 33.

Stack, S. (1987). Celebrities and suicide: A taxonomy and analysis, 1948-1983. American Sociological Review, 52,401-12.

Stewart, L. H. (1977). Birth order and political leadership. In M. G. Hermann (Ed.), The Psychological Examination of Political Leaders (pp. 205-36). New York: Free Press.

Suedfeld, P., & Bluck, S. (1988). Changes in integrative complexity prior to surprise attacks. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 32,626-35.

Suedfeld, P., Corteen, R. S., & McCormick, C. (1986). The role of integrative complexity in military leadership: Robert E. Lee and his opponents. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 16,498-507.

Suedfeld, P., & Rank, A. D. (1976). Revolutionary leaders: Long-term success as a function of changes in conceptual complexity. Journal of Personality and Social

Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. (1977). Integrative complexity of communications in international crises. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 21, 169-84.

Suedfeld, P., Tetlock, P. E., & Ramirez, C. (1977). War, peace, and integrative complexity. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 21,427-42.

Suedfeld, P.. Wallace, M. D., & Thachuk, K. L. (1993). Changes in integrative complexity among Middle East leaders during the Persian Gulf crisis. Journal of Social Issues, 49, 183-99.

Sulloway, F. J. (1996). Born to Rebel: Birth Order, Family Dynamics, and Creative Lives. New York: Pantheon.

Tetlock, P. E. (1979). Identifying victims of groupthink from public statements of decision makers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1314-24.

Tetlock, P. E. (1981a). Personality and isolationism: Content analysis of senatorial speeches. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41,737-43.

Tetlock, P..E. (1981 b). Pre- to postelection shifts in presidential rhetoric: Impression management or cognitive adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

Tetlock, P. E. (1983). Cognitive style and political ideology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45,118-26.

Tetlock, P. E. (1984). Cognitive style and political belief systems in the British House of Commons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46,365-75.

Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Integrative complexity of American and Soviet foreign policy rhetoric: A time-series analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1565-85.

Tetlock, P. E., Armor, D., & Peterson, R. S. (1994). The slavery debate in antebellum America: Cognitive style, value conflict, and the limits of compromise. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66,115-26.

Tetlock, P. E., Bernzweig, J., & Gallant, J. L. (1985). Supreme Court decision making: Cognitive style as a predictor of ideological consistency of voting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1227-39.

Tetlock, P. E., & Boettger, R. (1989). Cognitive and rhetorical styles of traditionalist and reformist Soviet politicians: A content analysis study. Political Psychology, 10, 209-32.

Tetlock, P. E., Hannum, K. A., & Micheletti, P. M. (1984). Stability and change in the complexity of senatorial debate: Testing the cognitive versus rhetorical style hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46,979-90.

PSyChOlogy, 34,169-78.

41,207-12.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14


Thompson, J. L. P. (1989). Deprivation and political violence in Northern Ireland, 1922-1985. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 33,67699.

Thorndike, E. L. (1936). The relation between intellect and morality in rulers. Ameri- can Journal of Sociology, 42,321-34.

Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pacemaking and competition. Ameri- can Journal of Psychology, 9,507-33.

Wallace, M. D., Suedfeld, P., & Thachuk, K. (1993). Political rhetoric of leaders under stress in the Gulf crisis. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 37,94-107.

Wasserman, I . M. (1984). Imitation and suicide: A reexamination of the Werther Effect. American Sociological Review, 49, 427-36.

Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., Sechrest, L., & Grove, J. B. (1981). Nonreactive Measures in the Social Sciences (2nd edn). Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.

Wendt, H. W., & Light, P. C. (1976). Measuring “greatness” in American presidents: Model case for international research on political leadership? European Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 105-9.

Winter, D. G. (1973). Winter, D. G. (1980). An exploratory study of the motives of southern African

political leaders measured at a distance. Political Psychology, 2,7545. Winter, D. G. (1987a). Enhancement of an enemy’s power motivation as a dynamic

of conflict escalation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52,414. Winter, D. G. (1987b). Leader appeal, leader performance, and the motive profiles of

leaders and followers: A study of American presidents and elections. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52,196-202.

Winter, D. G. (1993). Power, affiliation, and war: Three tests of a motivational model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65,532-45.

Winter, D. G., & Carlson, D. G. (1988). Using motive scores in the psychobiographical study of an individual: The case of Richard Nixon. Journal of Personality, 56,75-103.

Winter, D. G., & Stewart, A. S. (1977). Content analysis as a technique for assessing political leaders. In M. G. Hermann (Ed.), The Psychological Examination of Politi- cal Leaders (pp. 27-61). New York: Free Press.

The Power Motive. New York: Free Press.

Woods, F. A. (1906). Mental and Moral Heredity in Royalty. New York: Holt. Woods, F. A. (1909). A new name for a new science. Science, 30,703-4. Woods, F. A. (1911). Historiometry as an exact science. Science, 33,568-74. Woods, F. A. (1913). The Influence of Monarchs. New York: Macmillan. Zullow, H. M., Oettingen, G., Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1988). Pessimistic

explanatory style in the historical record: CAVing LBJ, presidential candidates, and East versus West Berlin. American Psychologist, 43,673-82.

Zullow, H. M., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1990). Pessimistic rumination predicts defeat of presidential candidates, 1-1984. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 52-61.

Zweigenhaft, R. L. (1975). Birth order, approval-seeking, and membership in Congress. Journal of Individual Psychology, 31,205-10.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f G

lasg

ow]

at 0

9:05

21

Dec

embe

r 20

14

Documents

Historiometric Methods in Social Psychology