Search

Although social change is diverse and ubiquitous, there is to date little research on the impact of social change on individual development, nor on the variables that may mediate and moderate this impact. This lack is, in part, based on insufficient consideration of psychological theories that may be applied to social change, but particularly on the lack of specific theories on psychological consequences of social change. In addition, methodological problems in measuring the complexity of social change have limited research on the consequences of social change on human development. With a focus on the effects of the breakdown of the communist system in Eastern Germany and Eastern Europe on individual development, the present paper analyses how prominent psychological theories can be applied to research on human development in times of social change, namely, Bronfenbrenner's ecological paradigm, the transactional stress theory, and recent developments of lifespan theories of control and coping. A behavioural model is introduced that analyses developmental consequences of individual's coping with social change. Finally, we discuss methodological implications for studying social change and set out future research needs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The title of this study is that given to the review of a book in a recent issue of Commentary. It also refers to an important contemporary social movement, namely, mental illness. This is a movement that accords to irrationalism a constantly increasing respectability. An enormous increase in the kinds of conduct classified as irrational has resulted in the past few decades from the work of some of the most highly educated and intellectual students of human behavior. One corollary is a decrease in the kinds of behavior classified as rational. This has been accompanied by a violent attack upon the concepts of reason and individual responsibility, and by attempts to substitute the concepts of irresponsibility and exculpation. These attempts have been successful to a great degree. This paper will concern itself with two problems that mark this social movement. The first problem is that of definition and counting. The second is that of resolving the paradox of irrationalism. It would be tedious to summarize the studies of the past twentyfive years that show that the interest in mental illness is a social movement rather than a scientific development. One of the first, by Kingsley Davis, showed that it possesses a characteristic essential to any social movement. Its proponents conceive it to be a panacea. As a social movement it is in many respects the functional equivalent of religion in the system of traditional middle-class values. The movement is today continuing to propagate middle-class values and ethics under the guise of science. It presents the prototype of the middle-class or upper-class person as being in all important respects equivalent to that of the mentally healthy person. Thus it is not to be wondered at that when psychiatrists and other clinicians (who are professional and upper class ) interview and otherwise "examine" lower-class children, especially delinquent boys, they find that the boys are "emotionally disturbed" or "mentally ill" in some form and to some degree. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]