DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00554

Acta Psychologica Sinica (心理学报) 2017/49:4 PP.554-568

A microhistory of psychology in letters: What happened to I. Huang's research reports on the size-weight illusion?

In the recent development of history and sociology of science, peer review practice has been scrutinized. However, historians have not paid any attention to this important topic in the history of Chinese psychology. Primarily based on thirteen recently discovered letter correspondences among leading scholars such as I. Huang, Siegen K. Chou, and Wu Youxun, this paper studies the complicated stories behind I. Huang's two publications on the size-weight illusion using a microhistory approach. I. Huang (1903-1944) was an important Chinese psychologist who received trainings in child psychology and Gestalt psychology from Arnold Gesell and Kurt Koffka in the USA. A few years after returning to China, Huang's research was severely impeded by the Sino-Japanese War, poverty, and terminal cancer. Nonetheless, Huang persevered in conducting research in hopes of delivering two research reports to international colleagues. Unexpectedly, in 1941 and again in 1943, the only two state-run international outlets both invited the same reviewer, Wang Jingxi, a physiological psychologist heading the Psychology Institute of Academia Sinica, who kept criticizing Huang's reports. Unconvinced by Wang's criticisms, Huang wrote letters to the editors in defense of his reports as well to his old classmate and colleague, psychologist Siegen K. Chou, for support.
These correspondences discussed a number of core issues in the peer review practice: evaluation criteria, the composition and qualifications of reviewer (s), dispute resolution, and institutional and social factors that shape research activities. For example, various evaluation criteria – originality, theoretical contribution, methodological rigor, sample size, experimenter effects, the suitability of the statistics used, replicability, referencing, and language style – were brought up and discussed. In Huang's view, Wang nitpicked about language style while downplaying other more important criteria, failed to appreciate that high reliability and statistical significance can overcome the limitation of the small sample size, and did not possess appropriate expertise to evaluate his research. When Wang criticized Huang's study as repetitive of extant literature, Huang argued, first, that successful replication is not entirely useless, and, moreover, that his research was mainly aimed at theoretical integration rather than empirical findings. Huang admitted that his reports did indeed have certain shortcomings but argued that the wartime scarcity of literature and research equipment had made these inevitable. For instance, such scarcity had led to Huang's lack of awareness of extant literature resembling his independent theoretical innovation.
In order to resolve the disagreements, Huang contended that his methodological and language choices were no different than those of authoritative psychologists. When Huang called upon Siegen K. Chou to mediate the dispute, Chou delicately voiced his support of Huang, his intimate friend and colleague, while paying due respect to Wang, the leading figure in Chinese psychology. Chou echoed Huang's proposal of recruiting additional reviewers, and offered further suggestions to improve the peer review process. Finally, Huang refused the two state-run outlets' sympathetic offers of acceptance of the articles along with remuneration. He instead submitted the articles to The Journal of General Psychology based in the USA. Unfortunately, Huang soon passed away in extraordinary hardship before his articles were published. It is worth noting that the published papers include editorial footnotes about their having been accepted by Arnold Gesell, who deeply respected and mourned his former student.

Key words:I. Huang,letters,microhistory of psychology,research normativity,sociology of scientific knowledge

ReleaseDate:2017-05-12 17:01:38

Bei, S. Z. (1984). In commemoration of the forty anniversary of Mr. I. Huang's death. In W. Z. Huang (Ed.), Child guidance studies: Memories of Mr. I. Huang (pp. 4–7). Hong Kong, China: Yu Yi Book House. [贝时璋. (1984). 纪念黄翼先生逝世四十周年. 见 黄文宗 (编), 儿童训导论丛: 黄翼羽仪先生纪念文集 (pp. 4–7). 香港: 羽仪书屋.]

Bedeian, A. G. (2004). Peer review and the social construction of knowledge in the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(2), 198–216.

Benjamin, L. T., Jr. (2006). A history of psychology in letters (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Chen, L. (1944). Achievement and failure of a psychologist: Mourning for loss of Mr. I. Huang. Thought and Times, (38), 6–13. [陈立. (1944). 一个心理学家之成就与失败: 敬悼黄羽仪(翼)先生. 思想与时代, (38), 6–13.]

Chinese Psychological Society & Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences. (2007). The complete works of Pan Shu (Vol. 1, 2). Beijing, China: People's Education Press. [中国心理学会, 中国科学院心理研究所. (2007). 潘菽全集(第1, 2卷). 北京: 人民教育出版社.]

Danziger, K. (1994). Does the history of psychology have a future? Theory & Psychology, 4(4), 467–484.

Fan, T. W. (2009). Huang Yi and his pioneering research on child guidance. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 41(2), 182–188. [范庭卫. (2009). 黄翼与中国儿童心理辅导的开拓. 心理学报, 41(2), 182–188.]

Furumoto, L. (1989). The new history of psychology. In I. Cohen (Ed.), The G. Stanley Hall lecture series (Vol. 9, pp. 5–34). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Gesell, A. (1944). I. Huang. Science, 100(2606), 512–513.

Harris, B. (1980). Ceremonial versus critical history of psychology. American Psychologist, 35(2), 218–219.

Hu, S. X. (1984). In commemoration of the forty anniversary of my teacher Professor I. Huang's death. In W. Z. Huang (Ed.), Child guidance studies: Memories of Mr. I. Huang (pp. 22–29). Hong Kong, China: Yu Yi Book House. [胡绳系. (1984). 业师黄羽仪教授逝世四十周年祭. 见 黄文宗 (编), 儿童训导论丛: 黄翼羽仪先生纪念文集 (pp. 22–29). 香港: 羽仪书屋.

Huang, W. Z. (1984a). Child guidance studies: Memories of Mr. I. Huang. Hong Kong, China: Yu Yi Book House. [黄文宗. (1984a). 儿童训导论丛: 黄翼羽仪先生纪念文集. 香港: 羽仪书屋.]

Huang, W. Z. (1984b). Memories of my brother I. Huang. In W. Z. Huang (Ed.), Child guidance studies: Memories of Mr. I. Huang (pp. 63–72). Hong Kong, China: Yu Yi Book House. [黄文宗. (1984b). 忆四哥黄翼. 见 黄文宗 (编), 儿童训导论丛: 黄翼羽仪先生纪念文集 (pp. 63–72). 香港: 羽仪书屋.]

Huang, I. (1945a). The size-weight illusion in relation to the perceptual constancies. The Journal of General Psychology, 33(1), 43–63.

Huang, I. (1945b). The size-weight illusion and the “weight- density illusion”. The Journal of General Psychology, 33(1), 65–84.

Levi, G. (1991). On Microhistory. In P. Burke (Ed.), New perspectives on historical writing (pp. 93–94). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Li, J. Z., Zhuang, J. C., & Qiu, B. W. (2015). Trial on open peer review conducted by Acta Psychologica Sinica. Chinese Journal of Scientific and Technical Periodicals, 26(2), 139–142. [李金珍, 庄景春, 邱炳武. (2015). 《心理学报》开放性同行评审方式探索及初步成效. 中国科技期刊研究, 26(2), 139–142.]

Lovett, B. J. (2006). The new history of psychology: A review and critique. History of Psychology, 9(1), 17–37.

Merleau-Ponty, M., & Welsh, T. (2010). Child psychology and pedagogy: The Sorbonne lectures 1949—1952. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

Schooler, J. W. (2014). Metascience could rescue the “replication crisis”. Nature, 515, 9.

Shen, Y. Q. (1984). Missing brother I. Huang. In W. Z. Huang (Ed.), Child guidance studies: Memories of Mr. I. Huang (pp. 1–2). Hong Kong, China: Yu Yi Book House. [沈有乾. (1984). 怀念翼兄. 见 黄文宗 (编), 儿童训导论丛: 黄翼羽仪先生纪念文集 (pp. 1–2). 香港: 羽仪书屋.]

Sokal, M. M. (2003). “Microhistory” and the history of psychology: “Thick description” and “the fine texture of the past”. In D. B. Baker (Ed.), Thick description and fine texture: Studies in the history of psychology (pp. 1–18). Akron: The University of Akron Press.

Spellman, B. A. (2015). A short (personal) future history of revolution 2.0. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 886–899.

Tang, T. (2009). The historical prospect of psychology: A comparative study of traditional history and new history (Unpublished master's thesis). Hunan Normal University. [唐婷. (2009). 心理学的历史图景: “旧史”与“新史”的比较研究 (硕士学位论文). 湖南师范大学.] van Rosmalen, L., van der Horst, F. C. P., & van der Veer, R. (2011). An unexpected admirer of Ladygina-Kohts. History of Psychology, 14(4), 412–415.

Wang, G. C. (1984). Shui Long Yin and introduction. In W. Z. Huang (Ed.), Child guidance studies: Memories of Mr. I. Huang (pp. 8–9). Hong Kong, China: Yu Yi Book House. [王淦昌. (1984). 水龙吟并序. 见 黄文宗 (编), 儿童训导论丛: 黄翼羽仪先生纪念文集 (pp. 8–9). 香港: 羽仪书屋.]

Xu, X. (2012). Mr. Wang Ging-Hsi. In X. Xu (2012), Selected works of Xu Xu (Vol. 11, pp.112–114). Shanghai, China: Shanghai Joint Publishing Press. [徐訏. (2012). 汪敬熙先生. 见 徐訏 (编), 徐訏文集 (第11卷, pp.112–114). 上海: 上海三联书店.]

Yan, S. C. (2015a). A history of modern psychology in China (1872—1949). Shanghai, China: Shanghai Education Press. [阎书昌. (2015a). 中国近代心理学史(1872—1949). 上海: 上海教育出版社.]

Yan, S. C. (2015b). Collaboration between Chinese and American psychologists on assessing intelligence paratroop commandos during the Second Sino-Japanese War. The Chinese Journal for the History of Science and Technology, 36(3), 355–363. [阎书昌. (2015b). 抗战时期中美心理学家合作开展情报伞兵突击队心理测评. 中国科技史杂志, 36(3), 355–363.]

Yan, S. C., Chen, J., & Zhang, H. M. (2012). Siegen K. Chou's military psychological practices and thoughts during the War of Resistance against Japan. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 44(11), 1554–1562. [阎书昌, 陈晶, 张红梅. (2012). 抗战时期周先庚的军事心理学实践与思想. 心理学报, 44(11), 1554–1562.]

Zheng, S. (2013). Ging-Hsi Wong and Chinese physiopsychology. Protein & Cell, 4(8), 563–564.

Zhou, N. (2003). Unscramble the history of the Western psychology: The revelation among the transition from the traditional history to the new. The Journal of Educational Sciences of Hunan Normal University, 2(3), 62–66. [周宁. (2003). 重新解读西方心理学史: 从“旧史”到“新史”的启示. 湖南师范大学教育科学学报, 2(3), 62–66.]