Although it has stimulated useful and important research and theory in community psychology, the concept of empowerment is problematic. This article criticizes two assumptions and values underlying the concept of empowerment: (a) individualism, leading potentially to unmitigated competition and conflict among those who are empowered; and (b) a preference for traditionally masculine concepts of mastery, power, and control over traditionally feminine concerns of communion and cooperation. The challenge to community psychology is to develop a vision that incorporates both empowerment and community, despite the paradoxical nature of these two phenomena.Community psychologists have long emphasized the importance of context for understanding human behavior. Leaders in our field have persuasively argued that human actors play out their roles in particular environments which offer specific constraints and opportunities and serve as stimuli for action. Yet, despite our awareness of context for those we study, we do not always apply that understanding to ourselves. My purpose here is to point out how our context --that is, the assumptions and values underlying the discipline of psychology in the United States --shape, sometimes without our awareness, how we define and study key ideas in our field.

No abstract

The influence of culture and ethnic background on women's experience of domestic violence has been explored in research only recently. Here the authors review research about the impact of culture and minority status in the United States on women's experience of domestic violence, considering family structure,immigration, acculturation, oppression, and community response. The authors encourage researchers and service providers to acknowledge the effects on women of sociopolitical dynamics, including racism, and to identify specific aspects of culture that are relevant to intimate partner abuse.

Starting in the 1960s, many of the critiques of psychological science offered by feminist psychologists focused on its methods and epistemology. This article evaluates the current state of psychological science in relation to this feminist critique. The analysis relies on sources that include the PsycINFO database, the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2010), and popular psychology methods textbooks. After situating the feminist critique within the late-20th-century shift of science from positivism to postpositivism, the inquiry examines feminists' claims of androcentric bias in (a) the underrepresentation of women as researchers and research participants and (b) researchers' practices in comparing women and men and describing their research findings. In most of these matters, psychology manifests considerable change in directions advocated by feminists. However, change is less apparent in relation to some feminists' criticisms of psychology's reliance on laboratory experimentation and quantitative methods. In fact, the analyses documented the rarity in high-citation journals of qualitative research that does not include quantification. Finally, the analysis frames feminist methodological critiques by a consideration of feminist epistemologies that challenge psychology's dominant postpositivism. Scrutiny of methods textbooks and journal content suggests that within psychological science, especially as practiced in the United States, these alternative epistemologies have not yet gained substantial influence.