Around the 1960s, political psychology was developed as a field of knowledge that attempted to interrelate scientific psychology and political phenomena. However, social and academic conditions are very different today. More and more, political psychology is becoming a protagonist, as much in the internal context of psychology as in the external context of its relations with the social world. Thus, political psychology can now be seen as a resource relating psychological knowledge to social practice, and relating psychological processes to social action. Political psychology is the interface that puts psychology and society in contact. The development of political psychology in Spain provides an example of this alternative view of the field. KEY WORDS: political psychology, discipline, resource, correspondence, democratization of knowledge.It has become increasingly clear that the activities and concerns of political psychologists not only depend on their geographic and scientific location, but also vary considerably over time. As a result, space and time are two essential coordinates for interpreting both content and meaning in the field of political psychology (Garzón, 1988). In this context, it is useful to draw a distinction between two ways of understanding political psychology. The first defines it as a field of knowledge, with the emphasis on empirical and cumulative investigation of a particular set of themes. The second sees it as an activating resource, fostering a productive relationship between psychological inquiry and social practice, between psychological processes and social action. From this latter standpoint, political psychology becomes the interface that connects psychology and society (McGuire, 1993;Seoane, 1995).Until recently, political psychology was primarily a field of knowledge, consisting of a theoretical corpus, a self-justifying methodology, and a circumscribed set of topics. Theory and research were applicable to political issues within society, but psychologists themselves were not typically engaged in political

Introduction:Recent studies support the identification of valid subtypes within schizophrenia and bipolar disorder using cluster analysis. Our aim was to identify meaningful biotypes of psychosis based on network properties of the electroencephalogram. We hypothesized that these parameters would be more altered in a subgroup of patients also characterized by more severe deficits in other clinical, cognitive, and biological measurements. Methods: A clustering analysis was performed using the electroencephalogram-based network parameters derived from graph-theory obtained during a P300 task of 137 schizophrenia (of them, 35 first episodes) and 46 bipolar patients. Both prestimulus and modulation of the electroencephalogram were included in the analysis. Demographic, clinical, cognitive, structural cerebral data, and the modulation of the spectral entropy of the electroencephalogram were compared between clusters. Data from 158 healthy controls were included for further comparisons. Results:We identified two clusters of patients. One cluster presented higher prestimulus connectivity strength, clustering coefficient, path-length, and lower small-worldThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

This paper conveys a vision of health psychology in three great moments. The first can be called a professional moment, wherein psychologists are introduced to the health field along with medical professionals, and develop a specific field, thereby trying to relate biomedical aspects to psychological ones. A second, or naïve moment means that health becomes an issue of responsibility of individuals. At academic levels, this coincides with the social construction of health as a dominant approach. Finally, a currently ongoing third stage is health service homogenization or integration. The main issue today is to integrate health policies of most countries through both collective and global action, as per international plans demanded by globalization.